|
|
Post by switch on Jul 26, 2012 22:02:25 GMT 2
I don't think you fully appreciate the long term aspects of this frontier agenda. DARPA is planning to build an interstellar spaceship 100 years in the future, not tomorrow or in the next administration. Currently robotic exploration dominates the space exploration doctrine. There are several reasons for this: 1) cheaper 2) less obvious to population obsessed with minarchism 3) greater longterm payoff. www.energyrealities.org/meeting-our-needs/population-change-1950-2100/erp39F30E259CF321207Some figures on 100 year trends. Another important point to keep in mind was my first argument concerning funding for STEM or SMET education. The military-industrial complex is being realigned to promote technical education (again) with the purpose of making space frontier developments amongst other agendas less controversial. Part of this is the transfer of launch capabilities to the private sector, which serves both to make space exploration less transparent and also less controversial by integrating space exploration into the myth of american enterprise. Preparing the population is essential, and propaganda is a useful tool in this regard: Concerning your argument about flat funding rates, I would love to see an example of any government organization that is not subject to budget cuts or increases. I should also add that NASA is not the only organization in the US (or the world) working on space frontier projects. The USAF space command, for example, is also accepting limited cuts: I would argue that all of these "cuts" are short-term, will be soon reversed, and are contingent upon out-sourcing to private business. There may also be a short-term desire to prevent an arms race in space, of which budget cuts is a policy tool for preventing such a race. Indeed, moving towards greater globalization in space is most likely exactly what is going on here: Last year, Schulte said, the departments of Defense and State concluded that commercial communications satellites and related components, with a few exceptions, can be moved from the U.S. Munitions List to the Commerce Control List without posing an unacceptable security risk. The forthcoming final report, he added, will identify more items that can be safely moved. |
|
|
|
Post by guest on Jul 26, 2012 22:26:45 GMT 2
USAF purpose is to use space as a waste of tax dollars to help us blow stuff up better. It doesn't care about space as a frontier. That's not its mission.
As for your point about STEM, here is a counterpoint: Liberal Arts degrees are useless. World doesn't need more salesmen & lawyers.
As for my argument about flat funding rates - NASA funding is not decreasing in dollars it is also decreasing as a share of the budget.
|
|
|
|
Post by switch on Jul 26, 2012 22:33:51 GMT 2
It doesn't care about space as a frontier. That's not its mission. I find this amusing because the USAF space and cyberspace frontier journal was in fact called The High Frontier.As for your point about STEM, here is a counterpoint: Liberal Arts degrees are useless. World doesn't need more salesmen & lawyers What is SMET education "useful" for? More technology? More technocracy? This is complete Red Queen situation. I'm pleased you've revealed your position here: philosophy is a waste of time, and technology is the only worthwhile pursuit, presumably for its own sake. |
|
|
|
Post by guest on Jul 27, 2012 0:00:10 GMT 2
It doesn't care about space as a frontier. That's not its mission. I find this amusing because the USAF space and cyberspace frontier journal was in fact called The High Frontier.Big deal. The name of a magazine doesn't have any great meaning. It is just the type of minor insignificant detail a conspiracy nut would latch onto. Philosophy is a useless major. If the world was full of philosophy majors we would all be dead in a month. |
|
|
|
Post by switch on Jul 27, 2012 0:05:40 GMT 2
The name of a magazine doesn't have any great meaning. Protip: You should try reading the journal issues before saying this. I'd also like to know what conspiracy you think I'm a part of. Philosophy is a useless major. As the soil, however rich it may be, cannot be productive without cultivation, so the mind without culture can never produce good fruit. - Seneca If the world was full of philosophy majors we would all be dead in a month. The point is, not how long you live, but how nobly you live.- Seneca |
|
par73
Forum legend
Posts: 935
|
Post by par73 on Jul 27, 2012 0:27:18 GMT 2
As for your point about STEM, here is a counterpoint: Liberal Arts degrees are useless. World doesn't need more salesmen & lawyers.
As for your point about STEM, here is a counterpoint: Liberal Arts degrees are useless. World doesn't need more salesmen & lawyers.
As for your point about STEM, here is a counterpoint: Liberal Arts degrees are useless. World doesn't need more salesmen & lawyers. |
|
|
|
Post by guest on Jul 27, 2012 0:57:13 GMT 2
The name of a magazine doesn't have any great meaning. Protip: You should try reading the journal issues before saying this. I'd also like to know what conspiracy you think I'm a part of. Why do I need to read the journal you linked to? That wasn't the basis of your proof of "frontierism." Your point was based around the journal's title. Regardless, the content of some journal which represents maybe .01% of the employees who work at the department of the Air Force is hardly relevant. I don't have the time to pick through the journal, and if that's your proof, then I might as well use an article from 1958 by Thomas Szasz in the Columbia Law Review as an indication that Columbia University as a whole participates in fringe psychology. As to the conspiracy - that one's simple: That's the conspiracy you are a part of... that somehow, SCIENCE IS CONTROLLING OUR MINDS TO DO BAD THINGS TO BENEFIT THE KOCH BROTHERS! |
|
|
|
Post by switch on Jul 27, 2012 8:23:37 GMT 2
Regarding the utility of science, I think you're correct about this; i would not want to appear anti-technocratic. It would be disagreeable to argue that the humanities are irrelevant. The question of why the program funding decreases or increases is a complex one. Programs and projects develop according to certain organization rules. The rules structure the interactions of human beings, who operate and administer the government bureaucracies and are prone to error. Economic infrastructure can be weakened by many forces such as natural catastrophes, wars, national bankruptcy, market failure. Political administrations change and oligarchs retire or are killed. In the North American Technate, a complex administrative structure was proposed to encompass the entire continent. I can't remember offhand but I believe the entire continent was divided into large rectangular regions with hierarchical administrative apparatus. At every level the most competent scientists advanced and dictated to the less competent. The American system today, although widely integrated economically with the rest of the world, also faces an enormous debt burden and limitations to infrastructure...  |
|
amino1
A better forum warrior
Posts: 117
|
Post by amino1 on Jul 27, 2012 12:20:26 GMT 2
I like Switch's posts. There's a lot of good stuff worth researching here.
|
|
|
|
Post by guest on Jul 27, 2012 17:19:46 GMT 2
I like Switch's posts. There's a lot of good stuff worth researching here. I suppose you felt the same way about raziel. |
|
|
|
Post by niggaplz on Jul 27, 2012 17:46:18 GMT 2
I like Switch's posts. There's a lot of good stuff worth researching here. nigga plz |
|
