Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!decwrl!ucbvax!ucdavis!iris.ucdavis.EDU!hulse From: hulse@iris.Berkeley.EDU (C. Andy Hulse) Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle Subject: Re: What happened? Could risk be higher? Message-ID: <6136@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> Date: 2 Dec 89 07:33:17 GMT References: <3893@hydra.gatech.EDU> <5082@jane.uh.edu> Sender: uucp@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu Reply-To: hulse@iris.ucdavis.EDU (C. Andy Hulse) Organization: UC Davis Dept. of Electrical Engineering & Comp. Sci. Lines: 25 Disclaimer: Yeah, they're mine. Of course the Regents wouldn't take a position... > >Personally, if I had a choice of exchanging a 10% chance of death for a shot at > >colonizing the moon for example I am not so sure I wouldn't go for it. > > Would you be willing to risk the chance that transportees > (involuntarily) took in Heinlein's _Moon is a Harsh Mistress_?" Someone with a sense of humor suggested a while back that we send Dan Quayle on a one-way trip to Mars. Maybe it's my idealogical side speaking, but I'm young, resourceful(?), and, I daresay, expendable. I would volunteer tomorrow for a one-way trip to the Moon or elsewhere, and I'm sure I'm not alone. I agree that it would be instructive and less expensive to have a base in Antarctica for a while, but I'll bet the view is better from above. Besides, although I wouldn't count on it, I think that once someoe's there NASA would get a *lot* more funding :) I'd much rather work here on the ground (I'd love to work for NASA; I'd sweep the desert if they hire EE's to do it), but someone's going to have to go up and stay someday, right? --Andy Save an electron! Delete your signature!