New Mars Forums

dicktice, the UN is a hotbed of anti-American bias, as well.  Your posts give the impression that France and Russia don't have an anti-American agenda, or the constant jousting over Palestine (however empty the so-called compassion is, I suspect its more of a push button). 

There are politics on both sides.  I hate how people throw out anything Bush says, but hold up things like the Amanpour interview as evidence of Chirac's nobility.  I don't trust either one, really.  What I am saying is treat them with equal skepticism.  The US is not automatically bad, just as Europe is not automatically benign. 

And the problem with the UN is that without American military backing, they have very little power.  And when so many of the countries make it a point to rail against the US, that's a problem. 

Hey, I think the UN is very important, but too much burden is put on the US to enforce the regulations, and no country has more demanded of it.  There has to be some reciprocation.  And the UN has got to stop being a convention center for domestic showcasing of politics.  For both sides of the political spectrum.

Josh, in trying to make "the other side" look inferior, you have just shown the same self-congratulatory attitude that you claim to rail against. 

"I don't sit in some sort of self-grandioseness pretending that I'm better than the rest of the world. Such things about how ?great I am? are reserved for the weak-minded who need some place to escape."

Case and point.  I know, you're going to try and twist it, like you try and twist everything else, into me somehow "missing the point" (a favorite strawman tactic of yours lately), but it's there.

If I had a doctorate in astrophysics, and we were talking about the Big Bang, wouldn't that lend weight to my argument, Josh?  Come on, you are getting very petty these days.

Josh, if the environment was devoid of plants, we would die.  You can try to avoid this as much as you want, it's a fact. 

And nearly all points of Earth, whether the grassless hill or the murky pond, have some form of life on them.  Nice try josh, your argument is quickly slipping.

Fine, now if you want Earth to be the way Mars is, bury the water, rip out the trees, and dome the cities.  See how long 6 billion people live with limited water access, limited environment access, and so on.

Please Josh, I'm just waiting to see your next method of trying to sidestep my post.

Removing the gold standard (however meaningless it is if people ever wanted their net worth in cash) comes to mind as a way of eliminating the dollar as currency.

There should be an official language for the affairs conducted on Mars.  The state of English hegemony has only come about because America was so heavily Anglo-Saxon from its conception, and this perpetuated itself.  An international Mars mission/base/colony will need a means of intercrew communication.

For only a few decades--the British planted the seeds, but if you want to blame America, fine.

Welcome to Earth.

If Europe could be today, they would be.

America outproduces the entire EU going by both GNP and GDP.  Look it up.  America's GDP surpasses $11 trillion anually.

If you say so.

Europe was populated by immigrants, too.  In fact, if you go far enough back, the only "native genius" would be found in Kenya and parts of China.

But yet, for some reason, we have been home to many of history's greatest minds.

Yes.  My family is German, I've gone to colleges in Mexico, and in Alsace-Lorraine, as well as Berlin.

My family is in the aerospace industry.  Not a lucrative industry, let me tell you.

And if had gone the other way, they would have been Soviet nurtured terrorists. 

Are you done with your anti-American rants?

A.J., I've got two economics doctorates in the house.  I've read everything from Adam Smith (parts of Wealth of Nations) to the Communist Manifesto, and other economics requirements.  Learn history?  I think you should go back and learn history.

It wasn't done nearly as efficiently as it is done with a uniform dollar.  And European trade will be much more efficient than the Euro.  When you have multiple languages, you have a communication barrier.  Sure, things can get done, but it is obviously easier and more efficient when people can actually communicate normally.

The Euro is also an economic attempt to reduce trade barriers and compete with America on a reasonable scale.  The American government also established the dollar to establish the federal government's position in the country.  A government will have a hard time running on 13 different state currencies. 

No, but it boomed afterwards.  Different currencies are inefficient, and they slow the economy down.  It may not grind to a halt, but I thought it was fairly obvious that I meant that the economy is much less efficient and prosperous as it would be with a uniform currency.

Except when the government has to post everything from street signs to collecting taxes.  The government needs a uniform language and currency for the sake of administration.  Imagine, a $2 trillion budget split among 50 currencies.  And then posting street signs in 5 different languages.

Whoa, whoa, whoa!  180 days?  NERVA can cut that in half 

The next step in NTR, liquid core, would cut it to 45-60 days.  And then gas core NTRs would cut it to 20-30 days.

Cobra: by gun control, I mean regulation (i.e. permits, not allowing felons to buy guns, etc.).  I don't mean banning firearms.

I do think that anything more dangerous than a 9 mm or shotgun should be banned to the general public. 

People don't need anything more than a handgun (which I doubt they really need at all).  But to allow Uzis or machine guns to be sold in your average gun store is also asking for trouble. 

But again, Amendments have been nullified before.  I don't see any reason why the 2nd Amendment should be taboo.  Freedom of speech and freedom of press are one thing, freedom to own a dangerous weapon is another.  I'm conflicted.  On one hand, I think a modern interpretation (without the pressures of British invasion, and the dangerous frontier) may be in order, allowing regulated access to small arms, may be in order.  Gun fanatics like to rant against fingerprint locks- I think that these are the way to go to ensure safety.

The problem is that your feet would experience significantly lower G than your head.

Zubrin's idea is to have a tether attached to the front of the ship, with something non-essential attached (maybe a tagalong satellite).  Spin the tether, and you generate significant G throughout the ship.  If the tether fails, you haven't lost anything essential.

Depends on who you ask.  Some people say the thing would have to be a kilometer thick to protect the ship, others say that the steel would hold up.  This is something that really has to be tested thoroughly beforehand, but who is going to put thousands of .1 kt atomic bombs in a confined space with a steel plate, and fire them off, to make sure that it will work?

In my opinion, anything larger than 10 people for the initial missions is wasteful.  The first missions need only to establish an infrastructure capable of supporting people, and lay the groundwork for future science and manned missions.  If you keep the initial missions small, you can set up this infrastructure more cheaply, and quickly (the base doesn't have to support 160 people and expand at the same time). 

I think we should also send cargo to Mars on an annual basis (for example, more domes, agricultural supplies, etc.) that the mission personnel can use to set up a full base.

Orion was designed to be launched from orbit.  It would have been assembled in orbit, it's parts carried up by 8 Saturn V launches ($4 billion dollars!).  The plans were not for Earth launch.

Well, actually, I think we're better colonizers, in a way, than the British.  We have an economic empire, and so does China and Europe.  Imperialism today is economic, not political, and in many ways, is far more beneficial to the Third World.  America's effective economic system has allowed a country of 280 million to outproduce the entire EU, and any other major country, by far. 

Rotten space explorers?  Our space program, both manned and unmanned, is unsurpassed by any nation in the world.  And the "uneducated" comment is a gross generalization.  Yes, there are undereducated Americans, but there are undereducated Europeans, Canadians, and Asians.  There are also many American geniuses.  Am I uneducated?  If anything, I'm lazy-I don't go out of my way in school, and yet, I've put many people older than me to shame in debates on everything from space to politics (not to toot my own horn, but it's true).  America continues to have the greatest college and university system in the world, by far.