

Buzz Aldrin Is Not All That Impressed With Walking on the Moon - jackfoxy
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/oscars/2010/06/buzz-aldrin-is-not-all-that-impressed-with-walking-on-the-moon.html

======
iron_ball
First visible comment: "I would love to see it to bad Obama, gutted our
awesome space program to give illegal aliens free health care."

Can we just burn down the internet yet?

~~~
jodrellblank
Tranlsation: "We're better than them"

Conclusion: polarizing, divisive, conversation discouraging pot-stirring.
Downvoted.

~~~
dRother
Why say 'better'? That's a value judgement.

Better informed and more logical is good enough for me, and somewhat hard to
dispute.

~~~
jodrellblank
Because I think the OP is making a value judgment.

You don't want to "burn down the internet" if you merely think some people on
it are less well informed than you are, only if you think they are lesser
people who don't deserve it, or to protect yourself / your group identity from
"them".

------
Jach
I don't imagine the eventual Mars settlers will want to pretend and be under
the control of the (US|Chinese|British|etc) governments, at least once there's
a significant number of them. Wouldn't they want to form their own nation
there? It'd be interesting to see how a society progresses when it's virtually
under no threat of war or foreign hostilities at all... It'd also be a great
way to reduce existential risk.

Some political ramblings, feel free to stop reading.. I lost some respect for
Obama when he extrapolated numerous things well beyond his possible term
limits, the space program specifically. I want to see him try and do more
exciting things while in office. Though I believe the limited budget is
starting to make NASA be more innovative again.

~~~
gaius
Political autonomy is fine, but remember this is not going to be like
colonization on Earth where an ordinary citizen could actually just buy
passage on a boat to America themselves. Getting the "chosen few" to Mars is
going to require that ordinary taxpayers, who will never get to go themselves,
make sacrifices. Is it worth it? Well I personally think it is, but that's up
to the voters. However for the colonists to then turn around and say "screw
you, suckers" is unreasonable.

~~~
timmaah
Not sure it was just that easy for anyone to hop on a European ship back in
the day and setup a new country.

He is talking decades after the first humans arrive. By that time commercial
flights and colonization to mars may be possible.

------
mkramlich
Hopefully today's generation learns who the Toy Story character was inspired
by:

Buzz Aldrin: To Mars and Beyond!

------
grasshoper
After all these years, he's still trying to make Michael Collins feel better
about that whole moon-walking thing.

------
avar
As Buzz points out, one of the biggest problem with the current space plans is
the "we'll go there, and be back in time for tea" attitude. I.e. the
requirement that anyone going to the Moon, Mars etc. be able to return.

We should be aiming for colonizing space with one-way trips and subsequent
supply drops. The colonies should aim to become as self-sustainable as
possible using robotic factories to mine and produce what they need on-
location.

------
asdflkj
He's right about the Moon landing being a stunt. But the Mars settlement will
also be a stunt. Curing aging--that'd be historic. Creating a drug that will
make us all happy and compassionate would be historic. Creating a "first
world" country in the middle of an ocean where everyone in the world is
welcome, as long as they obey the law and create wealth.

Space travel for our civilization is like a poor person putting gold-planted
rims on his shitty car. Evolutionary theory has explanations for this sort of
behavior.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handicap_principle>

~~~
dstorrs
> Space travel for our civilization is like a poor person putting gold-planted
> rims on his shitty car.

Well, that's one (wrong) way of putting it. I suspect you may be trolling, but
here's some reasons that we might /want/ to pursue space travel:

1) Right now, all of humanity's eggs live in one basket -- literally. One
large asteroid strike, sufficiently virulent pandemic, nuclear war, etc, would
wipe out our species. Planting a self-sustaining colony on a non-Earth body
fixes that.

2) A self-sustaining orbital technology (necessary for a colony) would allow
us to build enough solar power satellites to give everyone on Earth enough
clean, cheap energy for the next thousand years.

3) Putting a large chunk of our manufacturing on the Moon or in orbit would
allow us to reduce the environmental impact of industry.

By the way..."a drug that would make us all happy and compassionate"? Huxley
called it "soma", and I would not want to live in the Brave New World.

~~~
asdflkj
Huxley is sci-fi and not reality, and so are your reasons. If you want to
avoid a pandemic, invest heavily in biotech. If you want clean energy, invest
in nuclear plants and more efficient energy storage and such. If you want to
avoid a nuclear war, invest in infrastructure that will allow the world's poor
to create wealth and raise their standard of living and not want to kill
anybody.

By instead dumping all those billions into space exploration, you are actively
raising the chance of something terrible happening here on Earth, this
"basket" whose destruction you consider so nonchalantly.

------
dennisgorelik
Human colony on Mars? No returns? Does he know what average Mars temperature
is? Hint: Winter in Antarctica is a hot resort in comparison with Mars.

~~~
nkassis
It's not like they will be walking around in shorts and t-shirts.

Frankly, I think there is some good reasons for a mars base. It's a shorter
distance to the asteroid belt where mining could become a profitable idea.

At the very least, aiming for mars colonization would give us something to
strive for and develop technology for. The stuff that came out of the moon
program is still incredible today. We need big ideas. Somehow back in the 60s
and 70s, big stuff managed to get built. We should return to that style of
doing things. In my city, Montreal, they can't even replace a damn interchange
built in the 60s which is failing apart. One project, compared to about 5
similar scale projects built back then. Instead we get some odd trash disposal
system (read wired this month).

~~~
Vivtek
It's not so much that it's a shorter <i>distance</i> to the Belt as that the
gravity well of Mars is so much shallower than Earth's - making Mars a cheap
place to grow food for distribution in the Belt. The surface of Mars is
roughly the size of Earth's land area, so there's lots of room for farming.
OK, not so many volatiles - but put up some greenhouses and you're good to go.

~~~
dennisgorelik
It's much-much easier to grow food in Antarctica, than on Mars.

~~~
Vivtek
And much-much more expensive to get it off the planet. Also, six out of every
twelve months, you're wrong.

------
breadbox
I'm not all that bothered about establishing a presence outside of Earth,
myself. That said, I love Buzz Aldrin.

------
tokipin
i want to share this all-things-space industry/NASA YouTube channel that i've
been enjoying for a while:

<http://www.youtube.com/spaceflightnow>

------
hippich
I'd be happy to be mars settler... but where I should start?

~~~
mkramlich
on the summit of Olympus Mons

it would be all downhill from there :)

