To think millions of litres of fuel shouldn't be wasted on sending a rocket to the moon

[Viviennemary]

With this current fuel crisis it's total madness sending a rocket to the moon. What is the point. Nobody is even going to land on the moon. Doubt therei s any oil on the moon.

And how does this compare to the pollution caused by dropping $100bn worth of weapons in the Middle East in the last couple of months?

Let’s see an analysis of the pollution caused by space launches in comparison to total global emissions, and the emissions caused by producing and then using the weapons being used globally to attack each other, so that we can assess their scale and whether they are worthwhile.

Then let’s consider which is acceptable or not, in the context of what it does to advance human progress and the technologies that can actually help us to prevent further harm to the Earth and all the species which inhabit it.

All countries needed to and will still need to use fossil fuels. We need energy

Nuclear power is thataway ---->

❤️

I’m sure all of these anti-science posters will completely eschew the cheap and clean nuclear fusion power that the evil scientists are currently developing, because science is evil and “a waste of brain power”.

@ProjectHailMary I'm not for science developing weapons. Nuclear power/nuclear weapons. Not all science is good.

China/India getting rich due to technology but fucking up the planet, so new technology has to be found to sort that out. So how do we know this new space technology isn't causing issues which we will then need to develop new technology to sort out.

Again they need the energy. Especially India. Fuel poverty is a thing. They can't afford all the renewables. Weapons are there for defense.

Both economies have had a lowering emission intensity over time. Both have investments in renewables as well.

Again why do you think this "new space technology" (which has been around for a while) will "cause issues"?

Do you have GCSEs in science?

Why go to space? To quote a friend:

’Cos it’s next. Cos we came out of the cave, we looked over the hill and we saw fire, and we crossed the ocean and pioneered the west, and we look to the sky. The history of man is hung on a lifetime of exploration and this is what is next’

Again. The industrial revolution brought forth massive poverty reduction due to the increased availability of energy. Global living standards are so much better than they were before.

Nuclear fusion isn’t about developing weapons.

It would be a source of bountiful, clean energy so that there was plenty for everyone on Earth.

Therefore, halt most of the wars which are about resources, primarily energy. Once there is abundant clean energy pretty much all other problems go away in terms of food, water processing, preserving the natural environment, being able to farm enough food in much smaller areas with little strain on natural resources and rewilding large areas of the planet, etc.

The zombies clearly don’t grasp this though. “Science is bad, m’kay?” 🙄

Imagine being baffled by this ‘space stuff’ or think space exploration, research and all the things that have and will come from it are a waste of brainpower! 🤣🤣🤣🤣

Someone purely logical and less compassionate might suggest that continuing to power the “brains” of those who hold such views was a large waste of precious and limited power supplies available with current technology.

The article I posted above says it is causing issues.

@ArtemisMission do you think there are no bad implications to space technology, everything will be rosy and have no negative impact anywhere. That we won't be having to think of new technologies to remedy any damage

Driving a car, flying and heating your home all cause pollution as well.

@ArtemisMission and that's what I am saying the technology for that has caused problems for this planet, so the concern is that we are going to create problems in space with new technology when we explore space

Humans may be wonderful with their inventions etc but we always seem to leave a trail of destruction behind us as well, which we then have to find new ways to sort out

Okay? And? So we just never do anything because it might cause a damage elsewhere?

Did you ever study science? The comments of yours that I have read on this thread seem spectacularly obtuse and show little grasp at all of science to a level that is below what one would expect of an average GCSE student getting a basic pass mark so I am interested in what basis you have for the assertions that you’re making, other than reading some article in the Guardian about how space travel creates some emissions (yes it does, which account for less than 0.01% of global emissions).

Can you explain your concerns more clearly please, as to why space exploration should be a large concern for the environment?

Thorium nuclear power. Much cleaner than Uranium. I'll leave it to the bright to work out why we didn't lead with that in the 30s.

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/abandoning-thorium-as-energy-source-is-suicidal-for-india-scientist-warns-11218100

How can you have an opinion when you don't know anything about it?

You and the others like you on this thread are what's wrong with people now.

Nuclear fusion is only 10 years away. Same as it was when I was growing up in the 70s.

Don't bother in any technological change and innovation "it might cause some damage". "Oh look one guardian article said something"

Science is 1% "knowing" and 99% "knowing how to find out"

So are all the posters who are raving about this, think all science is good, has never caused serious problems?

There is nothing about space exploration that precludes doing that. The same curiosity and inventiveness used for on is needed for the others.