Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!think!mit-eddie!cybvax0!frog!wjr From: wjr@frog.UUCP (STella Calvert) Newsgroups: net.columbia Subject: Re: Scuttle the Space Program? Message-ID: <671@frog.UUCP> Date: Fri, 21-Feb-86 00:46:31 EST Article-I.D.: frog.671 Posted: Fri Feb 21 00:46:31 1986 Date-Received: Mon, 24-Feb-86 08:19:51 EST References: <661@tekigm.UUCP> <158@axiom.UUCP> <932@nmtvax.UUCP> <248@peregrine.UUCP> Reply-To: wjr@frog.UUCP (STella Calvert) Followup-To: net.space Organization: The Church of the Holy Starship Lines: 145 C.O.L.E.! Note: I'm redirecting followups to net.space, out of net.columbia. In article <248@peregrine.UUCP> mike@peregrine.UUCP (Mike Wexler) writes: >In article <932@nmtvax.UUCP> fine@nmtvax.UUCP (Andrew J Fine) writes: >>Let's ask ourselves a few questions: >>So what do we buy with $2 billion dollars? One shuttle, good for 100 missions >>(best case) with 7 people each. Or enough food, clean water, and other >>necesssities to feed Ethiopia for the next ten decades, easily. >Can you justify this claim? What difference does it make if he can? Feeding Ethiopia for the next century would only mean there will be far more of their starving descendents competing with our starving descendents as the energy crisis builds and the door to space swings closed! Ethiopia needs food for the short term, but our entire species will die on a single planet in the long term, unless we prop the door while it's still open. I'm not saying, "write the Ethiopians off!" either. But remote sensing satellites _warn_ us of droughts, comsats let us know of alternatives to our local form of government, and network TV brings Ethiopian deaths to our dinner tables, live on satellite! (In some cases, that has led to people getting involved in hunger abatement projects....) I would far rather, if I _had_ to choose (and of course the two aren't exclusive) take the step into space and teach my descendents to fish on the reefs of the solar system than give them fish for the day and not consider how they would eat after my death. >>Why have satellites and information systems at all, except to invade the >>privacy and keep records on a captive populace? Why have land and weather >>satellites at all, except to take advantage of another nation's resources >>and vulnerabilities? >How about to allow communication between people(Comsat), to make better use >of our own resources(landsat), or to save lives(navigation satellites). How about to provide enough data channels that we can sit here and discuss which social priorities we prefer. Melding this participatory anarchy with the current political system will be the major job of the next century -- and without spinoffs from the space program, and lots of satellite capacity, we have no way of permitting this kind of discussion between our widely separated and culturally diverse selves. >> What is so special about anyone that we >>must exhalt that person above all others in such an eletist fashion? Dear heart, that's exactly the point! As long as we are limited to one planet, where all must agree to one way of life or die, some of us will be "exalted" above others by their political or financial positions. Those of us who "must" leave the planet are attempting to ensure that there will always be a way out for unpopular ideas. And much of my concern about the setback to the space program is based on my doubts that I'll be able to pass a physical if we wait too long. >> Why >>shouldn't that person be put to a task that serves the world rather than that >>person's ego? I will die for the chance to help humanity into space; I will kill to keep from being "put to a task that serves the world rather than" my will. I am not a serf. >not despoil virgin(or even non-virgin) territory. What better way can someone >serve humanity than to find ways to supply the resources people want, without >destroying nature in the process. Thank you! But there's another area of service -- let's call it experimental anthropology. Down here, our social supports are so interwoven that there is really only one experiment, in coercive government. When changes are suggested, whether they involve letting blacks vote, gays adopt, or civilians carry guns, the instant response is "it won't work, and don't try it here or we'll coerce you." Change, in this experimental setup, is very slow. Rosa Parkses get arrested, Martin Luther Kings get killed, niggers disappear into ummarked graves, and eventually blacks can run for president without getting shot. But take a fair-sized sample of people, willing to experiment with a different set of social assumptions. Isolate them physically from their culture of origin. And find out whether these utopian ideas _can_ be made to work. If they do, use that culture to innoculate the planet. If not, then try another setup. >> Do we really deserve to go "out there" when we have >>such a mess "down here"? Just as the photo of the whole earth transformed our perceptions of the planet, and fed, no doubt, into your solicitude for our lovely mother earth, the experience of looking toward a new star in the sky, and meditating on the fragility of _their_ ecosystem, will encourage us all to clean up our acts. >>Earth is enough for us, if we have the will to cooperate, to transcend the >>bigotries that confound us, the borders that seperate us, to dare to have >>peace instead of waging war, to share what we have as far as we can give it >>without anyone having to pay for it ( the concept of having to work for one's >>bread is deadly when there is not enough work to go around ), to recognize >>that the most humble peasant in Mexico or India is worth more to us than >>the President of the US or the Queen of England. What do you mean _us_, earthworm? (Is there a usenet convention for a stubborn half-smiley? |8-> nah, that looks like a propeller beanie.) And WHAT do you mean by "not enough work to go around"?!? We have a universe to explore -- isn't that a big enough job for all of us? >>If humanity can simply change from mere descendants of carnivorous apes to >>something totally gentle, altrustic, and noble, then Earth will be enough. And if pigs had wings they'd be Dick Tracy, as my sainted grandmother never said.... We will learn to live with our carnivorous heritage, or we will die. If we all remain on one planet, dependent on one single and fragile ecosystem, we all die as soon as the top alpha-males push the wrong button, if we don't poison ourselves in some other fashion first. I forget, right this instant, who I stole the idea from, but someone suggested to me that the reason Gaea (or life-on-earth, if you prefer) built people out of monkeys was so we could build the tools necessary for her to reproduce. >This seems to be a very philosophical debat. I AM REDIRECTING FOLLOWUPS to >net.philosophy. Cross-post there if you like, but I'd rather not have to read that enormous group to follow _one_ interesting discussion. How about moving to net.space (since we're not discussing shuttle, but the whole program)? I could make an equal case for moving to net.politics.theory or net.religion. So let's move to net.space? I AM RE-REDIRECTING FOLLOWUPS TO net.space. STella Calvert Do what thou wilt -- not just a good idea, it's the law! Guest on Account: ...!mit-eddie!frog!wjr Life: Baltimore!AnnArbor!!Taxachusetts Future: ... (!L5!TheBelt!InterstellarSpace)