Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!gummo!whuxlb!floyd!clyde!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!trsvax!cozadde
From: cozadde@trsvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: Re: re: space colonization - (nf)
Message-ID: <3117@uiucdcs.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 11-Oct-83 00:52:01 EDT
Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.3117
Posted: Tue Oct 11 00:52:01 1983
Date-Received: Fri, 7-Oct-83 06:20:08 EDT
Lines: 48

#R:sri-arpa:-1199500:trsvax:56000008:000:2364
trsvax!cozadde    Oct  3 12:57:00 1983



	To: John Redford

	I quite disagree with you on several points.  In the main, the 
	Antarctica is definitely a more hostile place to live, do business,
	or anything else required of a normal life.  Space has only two unique
	problems, vacuum and hard radiation.  The problems of vacuum have al-
	ready been addressed and disposed of in the short term and the long
	term is being studied and worked out.  Hard radiation is a little
	tougher.  It requires either moving quickly during exposure time or
	using some bulky object (Terra, Luna or convenient asteriods) as a
	shield during heavy radiation outburst periods.  We will most likely
	develop better shielding as time goes by especially if a well paid for
	demand comes about.
	The main reason the resources of Antarctica have been left dormant is
	they are not unique.  Coal is found all over the world and is easier
	to get to than digging through a few thousand feet of ice and snow to
	get to it.  The same thing goes for oil, gas, metalic ores, etc.  If
	the Antarctic had a resource that was unique (besides being the coldest,
	most removed from Man's corruptive influence) and economically recover-
	able, the place would be swarming with people (like the Yukon gold
	rush).
	On the other hand, space offers several unique resources that are
	either impossible or very difficult/expensive to duplicate here on
	Earth.  The first is full range gas pressure regulation.  Second is
	isolation from immediate integration with the human biosphere.  Third
	is full range of energy sources, both intensity and type.  Inexpensive
	transportation is available to move any size or (theorically) mass
	object as long as it is not within the atmospheric envelope of a plane-
	tary body.  There are many more, but I'm not trying to write a paper
	here.
	In conclusion, I don't think space will be left as a barren wasteland
	as the Antarctic has been.  There are more reasons to go there to work,
	live, and grow than the Antartic has ever offered.  I'm so confident of
	this that I am planning to 'retire' to space to start my second life.
	I figure I can only live dirt-side until I'm sixty or so, but I think I
	could live to be 120 to 150 years or so if I live out my 'second' life
	in space.


					lt. of marines
					...microsoft!trsvax!cozadde
					...laidbak!trsvax!cozadde
					...ctvax!trsvax!cozadde