Re: from 6 billion to 500 million: how? (was RE: true abundance?)

Date: Wed Jan 31 2001 - 15:20:21 MST

John Marlow wrote:
> You know, I'll probably get all kinds of flak for this, but...

Well, if you ask for it so nicely...

> The chances that we're ever gonna make it off this rock in any
> meaningful way are a billion to one, to be kind. The chances that we
> make it to the end of this century are what? 10:1? 100:1 against?
> Worse?

If you think conventional manned spaceflight, missions would be
expensive. If you think industrial exploration, then we're talking
about some ten gigabucks bootstrapping costs, most of it R&D on
the ground. The more time and effort you spend on the ground, the
lesser the size of the seed you have actually deliver. After then,
it's about the biggest revenue bringer there is, and will soon make
terrestrial industrial output look like a mosquito fart.
> Star drives and colonization are cool and desirable--but, dude, we've
> got a lot of prep to do right here, right now, if we're ever gonna
> get there.

The problem is not money, the problem is lack of attitude. As you
might have noticed, we haven't been to the Moon in a while, but apparently
can afford to dump MIR and keep the idiotic ISS afloat. If you'd
sink into space R&D 5% of what people spend yearly for soccer for a
decade, you'd be surprised at the result.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:27 MDT