New Mars Forums

nuclearspace, you speak of nuclear energy in only positive terms.  i agree that nuclear power is a key part of our future in space; however, we must remember that radiation is dangerous.  im not off hugging any trees or anything, but i do think that blowing up atomic weapons in our atmosphere is a bad idea.  in outer space, sure, who are you hurting? 

if there are alternatives that are safer, and nearly as effective, why not use them?  just because it is not "the worst beast out there" doesnt mean that its perfectly ok.  nuclear pulse propulsion i dont agree with, at least near earth.  i support the use of fission, but with care.  remember, when many of those tests were done, we had war fever, and the government did a lot of things that would be very controversial today.  not to mention the higher than usual rate of cancer around atomic test sites. 

like i said, theres nothing wrong with nuclear energy.  but its not perfect, and we have to be careful with it.

i have one, havent used it in a while.  stargazing in new york is something of a futile venture  ???

Caltech, you have it backwards.  who was it that said true communism cant exist?  i remember it being me.

and socialism is a system in which the government regulates nearly everything.  (for cal, communism has no government)  this is totalitarianism.  you might want to pick the two apart, but you really cant have socialism without a dictator.  find me one real world example, and ill concede the point.

utopian communism, nothing would have value.  obviously, this is not the case in any real world economy. 

face it, my parents are both economics doctorates- my mother studied the soviet union extensively.  socialism is not communism.  it may be called that by people who wish to attract people to the cause, but it's not.

wrong.  learn your facts about systems of government and economy.  socialism is totalitarian.  communism has no inequality whatsoever.  therefore, socialism is a step away from communism.

china has nuclear weapons.  if it was as simple as an SDI, after decades and billions of dollars of work, wouldnt we have one by now?  please consider that other people far more experienced in their fields than either of us have spent a good deal of thought and time on nuclear defense, yet we dont have a nuclear defense yet.  what does that tell you?  any nation with nuclear weapons is a threat.  thats where MAD comes from.

china has almost 2 billion people, theyre willing to expend millions, trust me.  like i said before, on a strategic basis, we'd win.  we have capabilities they dont.  but i dont doubt that china would resort to nuclear weapons if they were losing.  they dont share the same western value of life.

caltech, read.  i said that we are their main source of income.  and i wouldnt write them off as an economic power.  where do you see a comparison to america there?

from everyone i know whos been to china, theres a huge amount of advancement there.  just because they dont do it democratically there doesnt mean it isnt happening.  like clark, i believe, said, why do they have to value the same things?  obviously some of their practices are repulsive to us, but they are mired in milenia of tradition.  im sure many of them view us the same way. 

and youre wrong.  communism in its pure form is conducive to laziness and greed.  socialism is a different animal.  patriotism and government forcing can result in a, shall we say, reversal, of laziness.  look at nazi germany.  how did a 90 million people take over all of western europe, save 1 island?  the soviet union, with a widely scattered and diverse population base, and huge territory, lasted 80 years, many of them in direct competition with the world's greatest economic power.  china has its own ways of forcing labor. 

i agree, capitalism is the best economic model.  it works best, imho.  however, it is a fact that all systems have benefits and drawbacks.  no system is perfect, and very few systems have absolutely no merit.  please look at the forest, and not the trees.

wouldnt this system lose effectiveness tremendously as the distance from the sun increases?

i dont think you understand.  it means nothing if one or two people get caught.  the pakistani government can't, and won't get every terrorist.

and we are china's best source of income, thats what i was getting at.  and i wouldnt write china's economic power off just yet--the totalitarian system of government allows them to direct money far more efficiently than us, and their government has been city and tech building for quite some time.

i'm sorry if my point of view on the subject of religion (and that doesnt include the evolution comment, it was more of a joke than anything), doesnt fit with yours.  i thought i was free to my own beliefs.

iran, iraq, pakistan, china, north korea, should i keep going?

I dont believe in destiny.  it makes it seem that the choice is being made for us.  if we expand its because we choose to do so.

other than that, i agree, destiny is dangerous.  it can give you false hope, or intoxicate you with justification for an evil cause.  destiny is not a reason for success, its an excuse for failure, imho.

no offense intended, of course.  and yes, i was making a point 

i think that by the time farms are in place that can provide a significant portion of the martian people's diet, there will be enough people there to privatize the industry, and place it in the hands of a group of experienced farmers.  i really dont think a community revolving around farmland is a good idea. 

there is a difference between our future colonists and the pilgrims: our people will go with their food, and any farms will be an added bonus.  the pilgrims expected to launch a permanent settlement off the land, only bringing themselves.

isnt quantam physics all based on loose probabilities?  like, x or y could be happening at any given moment, and its probably somewhere between them...

i find it strange that the building blocks of matter would not follow the same rules as the resulting matter.