https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbIZU8cQWXc
How come nobody cares about going to space anymore? Seriously makes me sad.
This ain't 1961. We've accomplished nearly everything we can accomplish until interstellar travel is feasible which they estimate may not be for hundreds of years.
I know more about the history of the space program in one pinky than most of you in your whole body, but unfortunately space threads always end badly when RIDF spambots throw a temper tantrum that they didn't land a guy on the Moon.
because we have a planet with critical problems right now and space programs are a money sink
>>51727396
With that mentality we will never go back. We will always have a planet with problems
<
Because there are not enough good movies set in the solar system. Too many people dream in green chicks, star destroyers, lasers rifles etc.
>>51727466
I have high hopes for The Expanse TV show despite it being produced by SyFy, I've read the books, it has potential.
>>51727440
the absolute madman
https://books.google.ca/books?id=XxYQCoaEU7AC&pg=PA462&lpg=PA462&dq=space+is+literally+the+most+stupid+thing+there+is&source=bl&ots=2EtGyPER1X&sig=1l_rGmQOIHepo75qKe1P2SwrGY0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiszIf828bJAhWMQSYKHblQAFYQ6AEIITAB#v=onepage&q=space%20is%20literally%20the%20most%20stupid%20thing%20there%20is&f=false
>>51727522
just watched the trailer. Looks good desu
>>51726943
Blame Obama.
>>51726943
>How come nobody cares about going to space anymore? Seriously makes me sad.
no money for dem space programs
![20121-12whiteyonthemooncover[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/Ej9GTbH.jpg "20121-12whiteyonthemooncover[1].jpg")
>>51726943
>How come nobody cares about going to space anymore
well, NDT has something to do with it.
>>51727605
the first episode got on the torrent trackers, and I liked it, but still I liked the books and am a huge space fanboy so I'm not exactly objective
>>51726943
Lots of people care about space. We'll probably have a colony on Mars within the next 15 years.
>>51727605
Syfy uploaded the first episode on youtube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvZeQD1Vf2s
Horribly low budget and a shitty start, but it has potential.
the shuttles kind of retired early and the atlas or whatever replacement was over budget or something
if you considered the shuttle program as going to space, it didn't really stop. the cycle just got delayed
>>51727522
>>51727605
>more "space opera" crap
they should adapt something that's actually science fiction instead of petty human drama set in space
>>51726943
I feel you, friend. I think, while there are a lot we haven't done yet in our own backyard, we are approaching them with very tiny steps and they don't seem to excite people as much as the "giant leaps for mankind" will do. When we eventually put someone on Mars, people will become very excited again. It's much easier for people, whose interest in space exploration is limited, to be excited about big leaps like putting people on new celestial bodies. For most people that's an easier thing to be excited about, because the concept is easy. While sending space probes and taking photos of surfaces is pretty cool and important to you, and me, most people don't have all the insights that makes them care enough about those things, why is it important to take those photos? What will this data tell us? Why does this data mean there could be life there? It's just a lot easier to most people to be intrigued by "hell yeah we put a man on mars".
>>51727749
it starts out as human drama, but then other shit happens :^) I'm not gonna spoil it tho
> be burger
> spend 125 000 000 USD budget on space probe
> pay lots of companies to make special parts for probe
> forget to tell one of them to use SI units instead of freedumb units
> probe disintegrates in mars' atmosphere
JUST
>>51727714
>the shuttles kind of retired early
It was 30 years old and becoming a safety hazard.
>>51727789
quite a bit exaggeration
the launcher is contracted but nasa has to build the probe and all engineering is done in metric
http://www.nasa.gov/offices/oce/functions/standards/isu.html#.VmPn47grJhE
freedom units are only for private citizens leisure
In capitalist society money will almost exclusively only be spent if you can expect considerable return, which space exploration does not offer. Leave it to the market and you will only go up there once tourism or resource mining becomes doable.
States do not have the money to support such an expensive endeavour for the same reason. They pout billions after billions in subsidies into banks and other large corporations on basis of our corrupt economical system, yet can not justify expenses for space programs because the voter is a mindless sheep only caring about his consumer products.
>>51727792
read up on it they are not due to retire until much later
them being virtually unusable was probably the plan in the first place
>>51727866
This. Space offers no short-term profits or gratification. All the promises and wealth are for the long-term.
>>51726943
Going into space is expensive and there are too few economic opportunities to make it profitable.
>>51727866
>>51727911
A lot of innovation comes from the government when they can convince the public to give them more tax money -- computers and nuclear energy during ww2 and the cold war, the internet (DARPA) during the cold war. We need another cold war t.b.h.
>>51728065
>convince people to give the government more tax money
Like that is ever gonna happen. At one point we have to get past that tendency to only invest in expensive technology when our lifes depend on it.
We generate more than enough tax money, it just gets spend extremely badly. Take the American defense budget for example. Imagine what NASA could do if it received a fraction of that money.
>>51727396
If we fixed the government, we could have both.
>>51727866
How do we destroy these voters?
>>51727887
NASA couldn't even obtain spare parts for them anymore. It was like driving a 1976 Buick with missing taillights and the frame is rusted through.
>>51728065
We could use a space race with China or something, but other than that, we have an entire "new space" industry that has popped up this century, some of which get support government support, including tech transfers and financing.
>>51728065
>We need another cold war
nah, there is already competition between private enterprises(that we know of), so in a few years space will be much more accessible
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pillaOxGCo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgLBIdVg3EM
Because there's nothing worth going to space for. FTL tech will never ever be real, so at best the furthest humanity ever gets in a moon off Jupiter. Then what? Unless we find space oil or something worthwhile people will never be that big into space. We should focus on robots, imo
>>51728270
You can't really do anything about them. We need to reset the values of our societies as a whole. Go into a class room today and ask the kids what they want to be. You know what you'll hear. The horizon of your average joe today is basically the size of the screen lf his smartphone.
That is what needs to change. We need to become a society with a mission. Today we are nothing but a managed crowd fed and bred to consume.
>>51728367
/thread
>>51726943
There's your answer, bIg GUYYYY
Because we gain next to nothing from it
>>51727780
Based. You got me interested
Extensive manned space presence is too expensive to the point of being worthless. Robotic presence, on the other hand, are much cheaper, replaceable and more likely than a Colonization Rush typically see in scifi. However, people don't like to dream about the exciting adventures of Mr. Roby-1, the intrepid space drone.
>>51728783
They're doing it though
https://youtube.com/watch?v=9D05ej8u-gU
DUDE EXISTENTIALISM LMAO
