I don’t think it is, have you seen how much rocket fuel we use? That stuff is not great for the environment. Also it’s all tied up with the military industrial complex and there’s basically zero chance of us going anywhere good.
We should learn to terraform here before even thinking about mars.
GPS, Weather, atmospheric changes, ozone depletion, carbon and methane emissions, Continental drift, tracking chemical spills, catching climate criminals, it’s not necessarily about going somewhere. Without satellites we are blind. Not to mention all the things we only have today because they were invented in the pursuit of space exploration like memory foam, space blankets, phone cameras, infrared thermometers (I’m especially thankful for that one), scratch resistant lenses, water purification, cordless power tools, cochlear implants and TONS of other medical technologies, SSDs and Flash memory, the more I look into it the more there is.
Yeah, a lot of that sounds… Kinda bad for the environment. I feel like you’re off track on the purpose here - it’s to downsize our collective way of life to AVOID Global Warming, not inventing more synthetic crap we don’t really need in order to accelerate it.
Amish, not Elon. But yeah, I guess you’ve proved why my plan is unrealistic. There’s always gonna be people like you demanding all the latest modern conveniences and an army of lazy minded people to go along with that.
It’s that kind of convenience cost that has a labubu and nintendo switch in every kids hands and factories churning out smog and toxins. You made one big pile of here-we-go-again.
To get these extremely important satellites into space? Yes, yes you do.
The big blow the fuck up rockets are a stepping stone to better, more efficient technologies.
I agree that billionaires using these rockets to fuck around in space is absolutely abuse of our shared resources, but your conflation of space exploration with consumerism is just plain misguided and wrong. There is nothing more important and beneficial to humanity than hard science without a profit motive.
The comment was about stopping climate change, not “consumerism”. I don’t know how many times I have to say it. Also, I don’t think weather and communications satellites are “extremely important”. We had a global phone network before satellites, and have plenty of land and sea based weather monitoring techniques.
I’m trying to prevent climate change, not aid it via giving all nations the right to launch as many rockets a year as they like to monitor it (and stir up spy shot and surveillance concerns between neighboring states). Like I said earlier rocketry a) burns a shit load of fuel pollution and b) is too tied up with the military industrial complex - tauting “The great new technologies for you pairing back of technology” isn’t an argument against those points.
For the last time it’s about climate change, not isms. About saving the planet by using and doing less, not about preserving your particular love of a scientific field.
You brought up consumerism, I just named it. That said, you claim you want to counter climate change, but you want us to scrap the tools that allow us to monitor and track climate change and catch major polluters? Those tools along with those that allow us to catch weather phenomena in time to evacuate areas and save lives are extremely important no matter how you feel about it.
The industrial revolution didn’t get us into this mess, just exacerbated it. Going Amish isn’t going to reverse climate change, just stall it slightly. And, most importantly, it’s a pipe dream. We have to be willing to meld both philosophies together. Science can’t save us alone and neither can international agreements to go back to the stone age.
We don’t get new tech without pushing boundaries. We’d forget how to make phones in a single generation if we stopped… We’ve forgotten how to get to the moon already. Space X is just continuing cancelled NASA projects, but they had to basically start over
You want to learn to terraform here? We’ve only got one shot. The only current idea that makes any sense is to just stop releasing CO2 and hope everything bounces back… But we might be past the tipping point. If you want to find out, you need satilites
You only get to keep our level of technology by growing new engineers. They need goals and toys, and they need challenging problems
You want to learn how to terraform the earth, safely? You want to maintain GPS and the Internet? You want to learn how to better clean sewage and the air?
It’s not either or. You can do everything you said while also letting the best and brightest play with rockets. You can shoot for Mars to save the earth
One rocket launch expells 350+ tonnes of carbon. Just to allow some elites to play with rockets?
That’s a no from me dawg. Go suck “the best and the brightest” off somewhere else. If they’re so bright they can focus on fixing climate change in a different way. Do that and they get to “play with rockets” again later.
Russia used highly toxic UDMH, SpaceX uses kerosene + LOX (huge amounts of Co2), as do India and China (kero the cheapest and most popular rocket fuel, pollutes the highest level of the atmosphere and lingers… Some are now using methane which is a worse greenhouse gas).
Liquid Hydrogen and Oxygen are just for specific stages.
But we’re talking 140 or more launches a year. I’m about as down for that as I am for keeping global tourism alive.
We don’t need satellites to track the weather or capture air quality data. The air, weather balloons, weather station, and radar is all we need.
The whole point of downsizing is to use less resources.
I love most of it… But we definitely need a space program. That’s how we learn to be more efficient, and the cost is incredibly low
In the future I want to be a Space Amish
I don’t think it is, have you seen how much rocket fuel we use? That stuff is not great for the environment. Also it’s all tied up with the military industrial complex and there’s basically zero chance of us going anywhere good.
We should learn to terraform here before even thinking about mars.
GPS, Weather, atmospheric changes, ozone depletion, carbon and methane emissions, Continental drift, tracking chemical spills, catching climate criminals, it’s not necessarily about going somewhere. Without satellites we are blind. Not to mention all the things we only have today because they were invented in the pursuit of space exploration like memory foam, space blankets, phone cameras, infrared thermometers (I’m especially thankful for that one), scratch resistant lenses, water purification, cordless power tools, cochlear implants and TONS of other medical technologies, SSDs and Flash memory, the more I look into it the more there is.
Yeah, a lot of that sounds… Kinda bad for the environment. I feel like you’re off track on the purpose here - it’s to downsize our collective way of life to AVOID Global Warming, not inventing more synthetic crap we don’t really need in order to accelerate it.
Amish, not Elon. But yeah, I guess you’ve proved why my plan is unrealistic. There’s always gonna be people like you demanding all the latest modern conveniences and an army of lazy minded people to go along with that.
It’s that kind of convenience cost that has a labubu and nintendo switch in every kids hands and factories churning out smog and toxins. You made one big pile of here-we-go-again.
Maybe read the comic again?
You don’t need big blow the fuck up rockets for that man.
To get these extremely important satellites into space? Yes, yes you do. The big blow the fuck up rockets are a stepping stone to better, more efficient technologies. I agree that billionaires using these rockets to fuck around in space is absolutely abuse of our shared resources, but your conflation of space exploration with consumerism is just plain misguided and wrong. There is nothing more important and beneficial to humanity than hard science without a profit motive.
The comment was about stopping climate change, not “consumerism”. I don’t know how many times I have to say it. Also, I don’t think weather and communications satellites are “extremely important”. We had a global phone network before satellites, and have plenty of land and sea based weather monitoring techniques.
I’m trying to prevent climate change, not aid it via giving all nations the right to launch as many rockets a year as they like to monitor it (and stir up spy shot and surveillance concerns between neighboring states). Like I said earlier rocketry a) burns a shit load of fuel pollution and b) is too tied up with the military industrial complex - tauting “The great new technologies for you pairing back of technology” isn’t an argument against those points.
For the last time it’s about climate change, not isms. About saving the planet by using and doing less, not about preserving your particular love of a scientific field.
You brought up consumerism, I just named it. That said, you claim you want to counter climate change, but you want us to scrap the tools that allow us to monitor and track climate change and catch major polluters? Those tools along with those that allow us to catch weather phenomena in time to evacuate areas and save lives are extremely important no matter how you feel about it.
The industrial revolution didn’t get us into this mess, just exacerbated it. Going Amish isn’t going to reverse climate change, just stall it slightly. And, most importantly, it’s a pipe dream. We have to be willing to meld both philosophies together. Science can’t save us alone and neither can international agreements to go back to the stone age.
We don’t get new tech without pushing boundaries. We’d forget how to make phones in a single generation if we stopped… We’ve forgotten how to get to the moon already. Space X is just continuing cancelled NASA projects, but they had to basically start over
You want to learn to terraform here? We’ve only got one shot. The only current idea that makes any sense is to just stop releasing CO2 and hope everything bounces back… But we might be past the tipping point. If you want to find out, you need satilites
You only get to keep our level of technology by growing new engineers. They need goals and toys, and they need challenging problems
You want to learn how to terraform the earth, safely? You want to maintain GPS and the Internet? You want to learn how to better clean sewage and the air?
It’s not either or. You can do everything you said while also letting the best and brightest play with rockets. You can shoot for Mars to save the earth
You just can’t do it for profit
One rocket launch expells 350+ tonnes of carbon. Just to allow some elites to play with rockets?
That’s a no from me dawg. Go suck “the best and the brightest” off somewhere else. If they’re so bright they can focus on fixing climate change in a different way. Do that and they get to “play with rockets” again later.
Yeah, I’m calling bullshit. Hydrogen-oxygen rockets cannot possibly emit that much carbon
Russia used highly toxic UDMH, SpaceX uses kerosene + LOX (huge amounts of Co2), as do India and China (kero the cheapest and most popular rocket fuel, pollutes the highest level of the atmosphere and lingers… Some are now using methane which is a worse greenhouse gas).
Liquid Hydrogen and Oxygen are just for specific stages.
But we’re talking 140 or more launches a year. I’m about as down for that as I am for keeping global tourism alive.
We don’t need satellites to track the weather or capture air quality data. The air, weather balloons, weather station, and radar is all we need.
The whole point of downsizing is to use less resources.