Americans are dumb?

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows that the people at NASA are some seriously clever people. Not sure I have ever heard a single soul challenge the intellectual awesomness of NASA. Therefor I dont understand the premise for this thread
Nasa is an odd blend of the intellectually awesome and the institutionally hidebound. The Shuttle was likea Rambler with a lifetime warranty ... prone to owner experience issues right out the gate , but what a repair team!
I think one of the reasons we don't have a clear successor to the Shuttle is that it embodied all sorts of compromise, esp. to a major client, the Air Force, that prevented it from being the cheap, unremarkable space bus everyone wanted.
There came a point when Nasa's main mission shifted from developing and launching bigger&better space missions ... to defending its turf and as many leftover Apollo jobs as possible. cn
 

MysticMorris

Active Member
I miss the shuttle already, such an icon in itself, along with the orange launcher. Its still hard to imagine humans exploring space without it :(
 

Samwell Seed Well

Well-Known Member
Ok cool we landed on mars..
What that gonna do fix the job market?
Feed the hungry families?
Let me guess find the cure for cancer?
Amercans are dumb, but I only speak for myself..
Lolz, mars...
we are what they want us to be . . . . . . .Mcdonlads eating, macys shopping, prime time sheeple, and they dont get it, the easy button is more important then thinking, but dont worry we aren't all stupid . .. im leaving when i can

many great things that i love about America, the intellect of is people is definitely not one of them, and ya imho the general population of America is retarded, less then 85 IQ AVG, i bet if we were all tested


clinton can get a blow job and is impeached but acquitted by the senate and house, and bush gets not-elected elected as our prez, and we as a country just bent over and took it, like good sheeple, blows my mind
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
I miss the shuttle already, such an icon in itself, along with the orange launcher. Its still hard to imagine humans exploring space without it :(
It can equally be argued that by going in for a quick showy rocket program like Apollo and derailing the fly-to-space-and-back programs typified by X-15 did us inestimable harm. The Shuttle was a patchwork hybrid of Apollo and defunct Dyna-Soar technology, with emphasis on Apollo's vertical launch and disposable bits. (The "reusable" SRBs cost more than disposables would have.)
If the fly-out-and-back development program had continued, it's possible we might have true reusable orbital craft today. The rich could fly from Paris to Tokyo or Adelaide in an hour.
But this is all speculation by a disappointed old bear. Currently there are no credible efforts to design an SSTO or other land-what-you-launched design. cn
 

halfloaf

Active Member
And like i said when we finesh exploring our own planet then yeh we can reach for the stars but if we are not prepared to do that then i see no reason to explore other planets.

Fuk there are parts of the oceans we have never been parts of the jungles we have never seen.
 

missnu

Well-Known Member
Who cares if you're American? This is an accomplishment for humans. Your children will benefit. Meh, 20 years from now you will see the benefit for your future offspring.
I don't feel like I benefited any at all because people landed on the moon, or mars, but that is alright...
I feel like perhaps american's are dumber per capita than some other countries...but we have a few smart people too... I feel like the smartest people are in france...But I don't speak French, so I will never know if they are smart or not...Lol.
I feel like I am reasonably smart, and I am American...
I have talked to a few not so smart people from other countries, but that doesn't make me think the whole country is dumb...
I don't know if anything would lead me to believe an entire country is dumb either way though...
And compared with some of the things that some places are doing landing on Mars seems somewhat trivial to me...what are we going to do with Mars?
 

missnu

Well-Known Member
It can equally be argued that by going in for a quick showy rocket program like Apollo and derailing the fly-to-space-and-back programs typified by X-15 did us inestimable harm. The Shuttle was a patchwork hybrid of Apollo and defunct Dyna-Soar technology, with emphasis on Apollo's vertical launch and disposable bits. (The "reusable" SRBs cost more than disposables would have.)
If the fly-out-and-back development program had continued, it's possible we might have true reusable orbital craft today. The rich could fly from Paris to Tokyo or Adelaide in an hour.
But this is all speculation by a disappointed old bear. Currently there are no credible efforts to design an SSTO or other land-what-you-launched design. cn
Hasn't someone in France been working on a plane thing that can fly you around the world in a really short amount of time? I don't know what it is called, but CERN was/is working on it...It's faster than a jet and more like a space craft, but I am not sure you actually go into space before coming back to land at your destination...either way..France has some super smart people.
 

obijohn

Well-Known Member
Aerospace engineer and author Robert Zubrin is president and founder of the Mars Society, whose more than 4,000 members promote the human exploration and settlement of our neighboring planet Mars. A new 15th anniversary edition of Zubrin’s book The Case for Mars came out in June 2011. Zubrin spoke with EarthSky’s Jorge Salazar about why people should go to Mars.


Why should humans go to Mars?

There are really three reasons: for the science, for the challenge, and for the future.
As far as the science is concerned, Mars is the planet that is the closest to us that could have supported life in the past and may still do so in the present. And so by going to Mars and exploring those dried-up lakes and river valleys, and drilling into the subsurface groundwater on Mars, looking for fossils, looking for microbial life that may yet persist, we’ll be able to determine if life is a general phenomenon in the universe or if it is a phenomenon unique to the Earth.
Image Credit: NASA/Pat Rawlings, SAIC

We’ll discover if we’re alone or not, because we now know that planets are plentiful in the galaxy. And if life evolved commonly, wherever there is a planet with reasonable conditions, and any star has reasonable conditions at an appropriate distance, then life is common.

And since the entire history of life on Earth is one of development from simpler forms to more complex forms, displaying greater capacities for activities and intelligence and evermore rapid evolution, if life is everywhere, it means intelligence is everywhere. It means we’re not alone. This is something that thinking men and women have wondered about for thousands of years. It’s worth going there to find out.


The second reason is the challenge. I think civilizations are like individuals. We grow when we’re challenged. We stagnate when we’re not. And a humans-to-Mars program would be an embracing challenge for our society, particularly for our youth. It would say to every young person: learn your science and you can be an explorer or pioneer of new worlds.

And out of that challenge, we get millions of scientists, engineers, inventors, doctors, medical researchers, technological entrepreneurs. These are the kind of people that drive society forward. You might view it as a tremendously powerful investment in intellectual capital.
And then, finally, we should go to Mars for the future. Earth is not the only world. And if we go to Mars, we’re beginning humanity’s career as a multi-planet, spacefaring species. If we do this, 500 years from now there will be new branches of human civilization on Mars and, I believe, on many worlds beyond.

When those people look back at our time, what will they consider of what we’re doing today to be significant? What we did to make their civilization possible – new worlds, new countries, new nations with new languages and new histories – that’s what’s important.


By your estimation, what would it take to set up a human base on Mars?
We need to develop a heavy lift vehicle, comparable to the Saturn V rockets that we had in the 1960s. And if we had such rockets, it would take two launches for each mission to Mars. The first sends a return vehicle to Mars with no one in it. And that goes and it lands on Mars, and it runs a pump and sucks in the Martian air and actually processes that into propellant for the return trip, using very well-understood chemical engineering processes that are described in my book The Case for Mars. We’ve done it in the lab, and other people have too.
Image Credit: NASA

And then once that’s done, then the second rocket shoots a habitat rocket out to Mars with a crew in it. And they land near the Earth return vehicle. They use their habitat craft as their house while they’re on Mars, as their exploration base.

At the end of a year and a half exploring Mars, they get back, they get in the Earth return vehicle and fly back to Earth. They leave their habitat on Mars. Each time you do this, you add another habitat to the base. And pretty soon, you have the beginning of the first human settlement on a new world. There’s nothing in this that’s fundamentally beyond our technology.
Certainly there are challenges, but these challenges are not as great as those we faced going to the moon in the 1960s. Starting with near-zero space capability and experience, starting with a country that had not yet invented push-button telephones, and we made it to the moon.


What is your vision of what people would actually do on Mars? What would a human settlement be like?

The first people to go to Mars will not be settlers. They’ll be explorers. And they will be exploring a number of things. For example, they’ll explore for the resources that will support future human settlement.

Of immediate concern to most people will be to try and resolve key science questions about the existence of life on Mars, past or present. Mars is a cold and dry planet on its surface today. But it was once warm and wet. We know that because there are water erosion features all over the surface of Mars. On Earth, wherever you find liquid water, you find life. If we can explore these places and look for even fossils of of past life deposited there, we’ll know that Mars once had life.

Furthermore, we now know that there is liquid water underground on Mars. And there are even some places where methane is being emitted from the surface. On Earth, methane only comes from two sources – from bacteria or from hydrothermal vents. And – if it’s bacteria, it’s life. If it’s a hydrothermal vent, it’s an environment that can support life. So if we can go and drill down and get samples from places and take a look at what’s there – and perhaps even find existing Martian microbes – we can subject them to biochemical examination. We’ll be able to look at them and discover whether life on Mars is built on the same patterns as life on Earth, or whether it could be something entirely different. This is fundamental to understanding not just the diversity of life in the universe, but its very nature.

That’s because all of life on Earth is built on one plan. We all use the same set of amino acids, the same RNA-DNA method of replicating information from one generation to the next. I don’t care whether you’re a bacteria, a mushroom, a crocodile, or a human being. We’re all alike in those respects.

But does that have to be? Is life on Earth the pattern for all life everywhere? Or are we just one peculiar example, drawn from a much vaster tapestry of possibilities? This is really worth finding out. And that’s what these explorers going to Mars will be working for.

Listen to the 90-second and 8-minute EarthSky interview podcasts with Zubrin on why we should go to Mars (at top of page). And tell us in the comments below. Do you think we should go to Mars?
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
I've read Zubrin's novel First Landing. Not all engineers can and should write fiction imo. The idea was stretched thinner than Joan Rivers' chin. cn
 

missnu

Well-Known Member
Aerospace engineer and author Robert Zubrin is president and founder of the Mars Society, whose more than 4,000 members promote the human exploration and settlement of our neighboring planet Mars. A new 15th anniversary edition of Zubrin’s book The Case for Mars came out in June 2011. Zubrin spoke with EarthSky’s Jorge Salazar about why people should go to Mars.


Why should humans go to Mars?

There are really three reasons: for the science, for the challenge, and for the future.
As far as the science is concerned, Mars is the planet that is the closest to us that could have supported life in the past and may still do so in the present. And so by going to Mars and exploring those dried-up lakes and river valleys, and drilling into the subsurface groundwater on Mars, looking for fossils, looking for microbial life that may yet persist, we’ll be able to determine if life is a general phenomenon in the universe or if it is a phenomenon unique to the Earth.
Image Credit: NASA/Pat Rawlings, SAIC

We’ll discover if we’re alone or not, because we now know that planets are plentiful in the galaxy. And if life evolved commonly, wherever there is a planet with reasonable conditions, and any star has reasonable conditions at an appropriate distance, then life is common.

And since the entire history of life on Earth is one of development from simpler forms to more complex forms, displaying greater capacities for activities and intelligence and evermore rapid evolution, if life is everywhere, it means intelligence is everywhere. It means we’re not alone. This is something that thinking men and women have wondered about for thousands of years. It’s worth going there to find out.


The second reason is the challenge. I think civilizations are like individuals. We grow when we’re challenged. We stagnate when we’re not. And a humans-to-Mars program would be an embracing challenge for our society, particularly for our youth. It would say to every young person: learn your science and you can be an explorer or pioneer of new worlds.

And out of that challenge, we get millions of scientists, engineers, inventors, doctors, medical researchers, technological entrepreneurs. These are the kind of people that drive society forward. You might view it as a tremendously powerful investment in intellectual capital.
And then, finally, we should go to Mars for the future. Earth is not the only world. And if we go to Mars, we’re beginning humanity’s career as a multi-planet, spacefaring species. If we do this, 500 years from now there will be new branches of human civilization on Mars and, I believe, on many worlds beyond.

When those people look back at our time, what will they consider of what we’re doing today to be significant? What we did to make their civilization possible – new worlds, new countries, new nations with new languages and new histories – that’s what’s important.


By your estimation, what would it take to set up a human base on Mars?
We need to develop a heavy lift vehicle, comparable to the Saturn V rockets that we had in the 1960s. And if we had such rockets, it would take two launches for each mission to Mars. The first sends a return vehicle to Mars with no one in it. And that goes and it lands on Mars, and it runs a pump and sucks in the Martian air and actually processes that into propellant for the return trip, using very well-understood chemical engineering processes that are described in my book The Case for Mars. We’ve done it in the lab, and other people have too.
Image Credit: NASA

And then once that’s done, then the second rocket shoots a habitat rocket out to Mars with a crew in it. And they land near the Earth return vehicle. They use their habitat craft as their house while they’re on Mars, as their exploration base.

At the end of a year and a half exploring Mars, they get back, they get in the Earth return vehicle and fly back to Earth. They leave their habitat on Mars. Each time you do this, you add another habitat to the base. And pretty soon, you have the beginning of the first human settlement on a new world. There’s nothing in this that’s fundamentally beyond our technology.
Certainly there are challenges, but these challenges are not as great as those we faced going to the moon in the 1960s. Starting with near-zero space capability and experience, starting with a country that had not yet invented push-button telephones, and we made it to the moon.


What is your vision of what people would actually do on Mars? What would a human settlement be like?

The first people to go to Mars will not be settlers. They’ll be explorers. And they will be exploring a number of things. For example, they’ll explore for the resources that will support future human settlement.

Of immediate concern to most people will be to try and resolve key science questions about the existence of life on Mars, past or present. Mars is a cold and dry planet on its surface today. But it was once warm and wet. We know that because there are water erosion features all over the surface of Mars. On Earth, wherever you find liquid water, you find life. If we can explore these places and look for even fossils of of past life deposited there, we’ll know that Mars once had life.

Furthermore, we now know that there is liquid water underground on Mars. And there are even some places where methane is being emitted from the surface. On Earth, methane only comes from two sources – from bacteria or from hydrothermal vents. And – if it’s bacteria, it’s life. If it’s a hydrothermal vent, it’s an environment that can support life. So if we can go and drill down and get samples from places and take a look at what’s there – and perhaps even find existing Martian microbes – we can subject them to biochemical examination. We’ll be able to look at them and discover whether life on Mars is built on the same patterns as life on Earth, or whether it could be something entirely different. This is fundamental to understanding not just the diversity of life in the universe, but its very nature.

That’s because all of life on Earth is built on one plan. We all use the same set of amino acids, the same RNA-DNA method of replicating information from one generation to the next. I don’t care whether you’re a bacteria, a mushroom, a crocodile, or a human being. We’re all alike in those respects.

But does that have to be? Is life on Earth the pattern for all life everywhere? Or are we just one peculiar example, drawn from a much vaster tapestry of possibilities? This is really worth finding out. And that’s what these explorers going to Mars will be working for.

Listen to the 90-second and 8-minute EarthSky interview podcasts with Zubrin on why we should go to Mars (at top of page). And tell us in the comments below. Do you think we should go to Mars?
Ok ok ok...so I have questioned this before, but what if the whole existence as we know it is on loop...What if this isn't the first planet we lived on...what if there was a planet before, what if Mars is supposed to be the next planet people pop up on after we destroy the earth...what if those little bacteria we found are actually our future ancestors, or our past...
What if the last run of people were on Mars and that is now what it looks like? We killed everything, but perhaps one or 2 people jumped ship...or what if whatever made Mars more lifeless also pushed Earth as we know it into being...What if in messing with Mars we are starting it's deterioration while it is in the early stages of regeneration, and we mess it up for the next human span of existence...? Seems scary with few benefits.
 

missnu

Well-Known Member
What I am afraid of is what if the life on Earth we know, is not the first time that humans have lived on a planet...we all see the destruction that has been dealt the Earth...I have always wondered if perhaps life as we know it isn't just perpetually cyclic...
As in human being come into existence...they build and build and build and end up blowing up their planet...and in a million years it starts all over...how do we know that the other planets aren't our many and various earlier attempts...we don't know...but drilling and trashing up Mars in the name of science might not be the best way to find out...
Perhaps there have been hundreds of human existence cycles...perhaps a million worlds have been created and destroyed over and over and over...
 

Trolling

New Member
Maybe so, but i bet they dont come back tho.
That's what people said when we went to the moon.
Conspiracy?!

And like i said when we finesh exploring our own planet then yeh we can reach for the stars but if we are not prepared to do that then i see no reason to explore other planets.

Fuk there are parts of the oceans we have never been parts of the jungles we have never seen.
Lol, "finesh"
Their are people all over the world that explore new places all the time, 7 billion people allow us to do multiple tasks.

I don't feel like I benefited any at all because people landed on the moon, or mars, but that is alright...
I feel like perhaps american's are dumber per capita than some other countries...but we have a few smart people too... I feel like the smartest people are in france...But I don't speak French, so I will never know if they are smart or not...Lol.
I feel like I am reasonably smart, and I am American...
I have talked to a few not so smart people from other countries, but that doesn't make me think the whole country is dumb...
I don't know if anything would lead me to believe an entire country is dumb either way though...
And compared with some of the things that some places are doing landing on Mars seems somewhat trivial to me...what are we going to do with Mars?
I disagree, Japan is one of the smartest of smarts, same for Germans...I'm sorry, I'm being really biased here but I just don't care for France at all, I have my reasons.
Hasn't someone in France been working on a plane thing that can fly you around the world in a really short amount of time? I don't know what it is called, but CERN was/is working on it...It's faster than a jet and more like a space craft, but I am not sure you actually go into space before coming back to land at your destination...either way..France has some super smart people.
I'm sure they do tho, I dunno who's working on this but their is a few people working on this shuttle type thing, I only skimmed it, sec I'll find the link.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
What I am afraid of is what if the life on Earth we know, is not the first time that humans have lived on a planet...we all see the destruction that has been dealt the Earth...I have always wondered if perhaps life as we know it isn't just perpetually cyclic...
As in human being come into existence...they build and build and build and end up blowing up their planet...and in a million years it starts all over...how do we know that the other planets aren't our many and various earlier attempts...we don't know...but drilling and trashing up Mars in the name of science might not be the best way to find out...
Perhaps there have been hundreds of human existence cycles...perhaps a million worlds have been created and destroyed over and over and over...
The trouble with any "humans are not from here" theories is the complete lack of evidentiary support. DNA paleogenetics pretty much nail the fact of continuity from the earliest Terrestrial life to us, today. Fred Hoyle, British astronomer and general-purpose iconoclast, believed in "panspermia", the idea that life came to Earth from space, but he based that argument on negative evidence (he didn't believe sufficient complexity could evolve in the allotted time) but no positive evidence (a material find supporting a xenogenetic hypothesis). There's no good reason to suppose that there's been a previous technical human civilization. And with Scientology running about like an intellectual fox in the henhouse of the gullible, there is excelllent reason to suspect any such claims. cn
 
Top