|
|
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Manned Space Flight -- One of 10 Technologies that should die?
|
rjurek349 Member Posts: 1190 From: Northwest Indiana Registered: Jan 2002
|
posted 09-24-2003 03:00 PM
I just got my October issue of MIT's Technology review, and thought the board would be interested in an article I just read. Bruce Sterling, a science fiction author, journalist, etc out of Austin, TX, wrote an article titled "10 Technologies That Desrve To Die." He kicks it off by writing, "some technologies...are so blatantly obnoxious that the human race would rejoice if they were obliterated. A wise society would honor its young technical innovators for services rendered in annihilating obsoltete technologies that are the dangerous hangovers of previous, less advanced generations." And he offers 10 such technologies -- including nuclear weapons, coal-based power, the internal-combustion engine, incandescent light bulbs, land mines, prisons, cosmetic implants, lie detectors and DVD's. The 6th item on the list is, however, manned spaceflight. His comments about manned spaceflight: "One hates to see this dazzling technology go, but when one resolutely sets the romance aside, there's not a lot left.Thanks to decades of biological research, it's now quite clear that flying around the solar system is bad for one's health. Without healthy strees of gravity on one's skeleton, human bones decay just as they do during prolonged bed rest, while muscles atrophy. Cosmic rays blast through spacecraft walls and human bodies, while solar flares will fry astronauts as diligently as any nuclear bomb. I won't mention the fact that spacecraft are inherently rickety and dangerous, because that's a major part of their attraction. China is about to send her first "taikonaut" into orbit, to belatedly become the world's third manned space power. As a test of national will and skill, Chinese spaceflight is vastly preferable to, say, invading Taiwan. I promise to watch Chinese manned spaceflight with great interest, and I might even buy the mission patch and decals, but frankly, there isn't much there there. There haven't been men or women out of low-earth orbit in some 30 solid years. We don't seem to miss them in any way that is quantifiable. There is little point in stepping onto the moon, leaving flags and footprints and then retreating once again. The staggering price of shipping a kilogram into orbit has not come down in decades. In the meantime, unmmaned spacecraft grow smaller and more capable every year. Until we bioenginner ourselves to enjoy cosmic rays, or until we've got rockets that can lift a Winnebago made of solid lead, this technology belons on the museum shelf." |
spacecraft films Member Posts: 802 From: Columbus, OH USA Registered: Jun 2002
|
posted 09-24-2003 06:39 PM
Isn't this the same guy who wrote back in the 1400's that sea voyages were inherently dangerous, what with sea monsters and the danger of falling off the earth's edge?And wasn't this the guy who wrote that Gutenberg's new contraption was nothing but trouble, could smash fingers, and that anyone might print just about anything and spread their ignorant thoughts far and wide? Oh, perhaps he was right about that one. Mark |
dtemple Member Posts: 729 From: Longview, Texas, USA Registered: Apr 2000
|
posted 09-24-2003 08:58 PM
My reply to this article is that ignorance will probably never become a thing of the past. This guy's article is foolish from start to finish. Of course, that's just my opinion. quote: Originally posted by rjurek349: I just got my October issue of MIT's Technology review, and thought the board would be interested in an article I just read. Bruce Sterling, a science fiction author, journalist, etc out of Austin, TX, wrote an article titled "10 Technologies That Desrve To Die." He kicks it off by writing, "some technologies...are so blatantly obnoxious that the human race would rejoice if they were obliterated. A wise society would honor its young technical innovators for services rendered in annihilating obsoltete technologies that are the dangerous hangovers of previous, less advanced generations." And he offers 10 such technologies -- including nuclear weapons, coal-based power, the internal-combustion engine, incandescent light bulbs, land mines, prisons, cosmetic implants, lie detectors and DVD's. The 6th item on the list is, however, manned spaceflight. His comments about manned spaceflight: "One hates to see this dazzling technology go, but when one resolutely sets the romance aside, there's not a lot left.Thanks to decades of biological research, it's now quite clear that flying around the solar system is bad for one's health. Without healthy strees of gravity on one's skeleton, human bones decay just as they do during prolonged bed rest, while muscles atrophy. Cosmic rays blast through spacecraft walls and human bodies, while solar flares will fry astronauts as diligently as any nuclear bomb. I won't mention the fact that spacecraft are inherently rickety and dangerous, because that's a major part of their attraction. China is about to send her first "taikonaut" into orbit, to belatedly become the world's third manned space power. As a test of national will and skill, Chinese spaceflight is vastly preferable to, say, invading Taiwan. I promise to watch Chinese manned spaceflight with great interest, and I might even buy the mission patch and decals, but frankly, there isn't much there there. There haven't been men or women out of low-earth orbit in some 30 solid years. We don't seem to miss them in any way that is quantifiable. There is little point in stepping onto the moon, leaving flags and footprints and then retreating once again. The staggering price of shipping a kilogram into orbit has not come down in decades. In the meantime, unmmaned spacecraft grow smaller and more capable every year. Until we bioenginner ourselves to enjoy cosmic rays, or until we've got rockets that can lift a Winnebago made of solid lead, this technology belons on the museum shelf."
|
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 42981 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 09-24-2003 09:21 PM
I'm betting this guy didn't do well on his SATs when in high school:Which of the following does not belong: a. nuclear weapons b. coal-based power c. internal combustion engine d. DVDs e. manned spaceflight Answer: E "Manned spaceflight" is not a technology, at least not when compared to the other items on his list. If he had, say, included the Space Shuttle, then it would fit. But for his list to make sense, then it would have had to have taken the shape of: a. War b. Artificial heating c. Powered transportation d. Archived media e. Manned spaceflight Its true that solving the problem(s) of manned spaceflight involved/involves a great deal of different technologies -- some that have been good choices, some not so good. But that's the core of any scientific endeavor: (1) devise a hypothesis, (2) test a hypothesis, (3) revise a hypothesis. The answer is not to stop at (2) when you don't like the outcome. |
Rodina Member Posts: 836 From: Lafayette, CA Registered: Oct 2001
|
posted 09-24-2003 11:02 PM
Sterling's always been a bit of a Luddite, in my estimation. Damned smart, damned talented, but always fearful -- not hopeful -- about the future. |
Gordon Reade Member Posts: 334 From: USA Registered: Nov 2002
|
posted 09-26-2003 05:02 PM
If God had ment man to fly He would have given us wings!And if he had ment for us to ride in trains he would have given us wheels! |
tegwilym Member Posts: 2331 From: Sturgeon Bay, WI Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 09-26-2003 07:32 PM
quote: Originally posted by Gordon Reade: If God had ment man to fly He would have given us wings!
Wrong...God would have given us MONEY ! (spoken from a pilot)  Tom
| |
Contact Us | The Source for Space History & Artifacts
Copyright 2020 collectSPACE.com All rights reserved.

Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47a
|
|
|
advertisement
|