If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   A careful, point-by-point analysis of why Newt's moon base idea is pants-on-head retarded   (slate.com) divider line 226
    More: Obvious, newts  
•       •       •

15268 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Jan 2012 at 2:40 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



226 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-01-30 02:58:13 PM
What we need is a large interplanetary self-sustaining migration spaceship capable of transforming into giant robot with particle cannon gun for self defense, escorted by fleets of fighters capable of transforming into different modes for different combat environments to handle possible giant hostile humanoid aliens.
 
2012-01-30 02:58:24 PM
M-O-O-N

that spells Newt!
 
2012-01-30 02:58:25 PM

Sock Ruh Tease: We shouldn't hate space exploration.


No we shouldn't. We should also realize that meaningful space exploration and manned space flight are not the same things.
 
2012-01-30 02:58:39 PM
There is a homeless man living in a section of woods in my neighborhood who literally wears pants on his head. He doesn't speak to anyone except the occasional growl at kids in the park, and he usually walks by quickly like he's late for something, all the while with a pair of jeans on his head. I would rather he be the next president than Newt.
 
2012-01-30 02:59:18 PM
Ozziepants go on your head.
 
2012-01-30 03:00:35 PM
Is Newt not getting the message? Should we turn it up all the way?
 
2012-01-30 03:00:39 PM

Klippoklondike: Ozzie Pants go on your head and actually have pretty high defense

[img33.imageshack.us image 153x120]

/guess this means Obama is Magus


DAMNIT

That's what I get for not reading the thread.
 
2012-01-30 03:00:43 PM
Freepers have always said space exploration is a waste of money until NASA got a bunch of cuts and since Obama is president, suddenly they are all for it.
 
2012-01-30 03:01:19 PM

meanmutton: olddinosaur: In 1945 it cost $10 a minute to talk from New York to Los Angeles, and you couldn't do it all the time.

In 2011, I bought a whole telephone at Walmart for $10, and a card for $20 which lets me talk anywhere in the world for 18 cents a minute. I checked the phone by calling a guy at the next table ten feet away and there was a 1/4--second lag, because the call was bounced off satellite.

Your phone, your computer, your Innertubes, your banking and credit systems, all come from space research.

In 1961 the average life expectancy was 65 years, while today it is 78 for women, 74 for men---and rising. Most of that is due to space research.

Crops are better every year because space research has made for better weather forecasts, so don't talk with your mouth full---it is not polite.

If you really think space research is a crock, go ahead and braid yourself a grass skirt and chase your dinner with a sharp stick; the rest of us like the good things in life which scientific research has to offer. Take your horsesh*t opinions and wipe your ass with them.

So little of the above is true that it makes me wonder if you're a troll.


Like what, specifically?
 
2012-01-30 03:01:41 PM
And now for a traditional Moon shanty:

We're whalers on the Moon
We carry a harpoon
But there ain't no whales
So we tell tall tales
And sing this whaling tune
 
2012-01-30 03:01:45 PM

chimp_ninja: Useful factoid for assessing the feasibility of random space-based ideas: It costs about $5,000 to $10,000 (different estimates) to put one pound of whatever into geosynchronous orbit, let alone safely down on the moon's surface. Call it $20M/ton on the low end, assuming some research breakthroughs and economies of scale.

When people start talking about mining operations to build underground barracks, think about the equipment, people, food, water, and supplies it would take. One small John Deere backhoe for digging trenches? That'll be ~$160M for shipping and handling, and please bring your own fuel, and the oxygen to burn it in. And replacement parts. The warranty probably doesn't apply when lunar regolith scratches and fouls up anything with moving parts.


Phooey. Newt's tax cuts will wipe out the national debt in six months and we can afford to build three moon cities

/lunar? Or looney? We report, you decide
 
2012-01-30 03:01:57 PM
Correction: What specifically is not true?
 
2012-01-30 03:02:02 PM

FightDirector: On the third GRIPPING hand, though, he's basically just sucking up to the Florida areospace industry, and will be just as likely to stay faithful to this campaign promise as he was to stay faithful to his wife.


Fixed for Niven and Moties.
 
2012-01-30 03:02:10 PM
I'm all for space stuff. I think it's important and we need to do it.

But as a realist, I cannot believe that with the economy in the crapper that any political candidate would be brave* enough to suggest that this kind of commitment is a good idea. The voters are going to hate it and his ideas seem to be ludicrously expensive and honestly somewhat pointless.

* There is a very fine line between brave and stupid. It's been crossed pretty badly in this case, I think.
 
2012-01-30 03:02:18 PM

Rincewind53: Other commenters on the article share a depressing lack of understanding of how science works


As do those who think the science coming out of the ISS is in any way worth the cost. How many other projects have been unfunded or underfunded to pay for the white elephant? Other than the experiments on long term human exposure to zero g, what science could not have been done for lower cost by unmanned probes?
 
2012-01-30 03:02:23 PM
Know who else thought it would be a good idea to go to the moon?


amphetamines.com



/Not a Newt supporter
//It's not that crazy of an idea
 
2012-01-30 03:03:07 PM
www.best-horror-movies.com

The stupid, they mostly come out of politicians. Mostly.
 
2012-01-30 03:03:14 PM

CliChe Guevara: mars would actually be cheaper, easier, and more technically feasible to establish a presence on.


Why?
 
2012-01-30 03:03:30 PM

BalugaJoe: First we have a moonbase. Next they are throwing rocks at us.


i.imgur.com
 
2012-01-30 03:03:56 PM
Meh. I knew it probably was going to be implausible, but I couldn't help but get starry-eyed when I heard him say that.

Seriously, a base on the moon? Aside from all the reasons why it wouldn't work anytime in the near future, that would still be farking awesome!
 
2012-01-30 03:03:57 PM
We don't have the ability to get to the moon any more. We've forgotten how, we'd have to start over from scratch.
 
2012-01-30 03:04:47 PM
Lawrence Krauss would have finished his work and got to the bar a lot faster and reduced his article to: "New Gingrich is an idiot, who'd suck a cock in public to get elected."
 
2012-01-30 03:04:52 PM
I have to laugh. This was on the front page of money.cnn.corn

i2.cdn.turner.com
 
2012-01-30 03:06:03 PM

olddinosaur: In 1945 it cost $10 a minute to talk from New York to Los Angeles, and you couldn't do it all the time.

In 2011, I bought a whole telephone at Walmart for $10, and a card for $20 which lets me talk anywhere in the world for 18 cents a minute. I checked the phone by calling a guy at the next table ten feet away and there was a 1/4--second lag, because the call was bounced off satellite.

Your phone, your computer, your Innertubes, your banking and credit systems, all come from space research.

In 1961 the average life expectancy was 65 years, while today it is 78 for women, 74 for men---and rising. Most of that is due to space research.

Crops are better every year because space research has made for better weather forecasts, so don't talk with your mouth full---it is not polite.

If you really think space research is a crock, go ahead and braid yourself a grass skirt and chase your dinner with a sharp stick; the rest of us like the good things in life which scientific research has to offer. Take your horsesh*t opinions and wipe your ass with them.




Low earth orbit is a vital component of Earth's economy -- but it has practically nothing to do with the actual physical presence of human beings in low earth orbit -- much less the moon
 
2012-01-30 03:06:34 PM

Eddie Adams from Torrance: In all fairness to Newt, he doesn't really believe that we need a moon base. He's just pandering to the aerospace employees in FL.

When the NV primaries roll around, he'll probably be advocating for a casino and whorehouse on Mars.


Exactly. As much as I want it to be true and real and as much as I wish we could have these types of programs with the type of national zeal we had 50 years ago, I know it's just Newt pandering to the local base.
 
2012-01-30 03:06:35 PM

9beers: xtragrind: So we are against space exploration now? Any politician, whether retarded or not, pushing for space exploration is a good thing.

Yeah, I don't get why this blew up the way it did.


Because of the source. If it were a respected astrophysicist relating the technical details and possible benefits then people might have reason to listen. But it's Newt Farking Gingrich. The only thing that stupid asshole knows about science is what his staffers told him that might be beneficial in the polls.
 
2012-01-30 03:06:40 PM

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: Know who else thought it would be a good idea to go to the moon?


I knew him!

/he was my friend
//Newt is no him
 
2012-01-30 03:07:58 PM

Masso: What we need is a large interplanetary self-sustaining migration spaceship capable of transforming into giant robot with particle cannon gun for self defense, escorted by fleets of fighters capable of transforming into different modes for different combat environments to handle possible giant hostile humanoid aliens.


I like your plan, but I feel that such a plan is going to need something else. Perhaps a chinzy musical accompaniment and a pointless love triangle composed of three incredibly annoying characters.


/whole thing should have been about Roy and Max, with Miriya thrown in halfway through. Keep Gloval and the Bridge bunnies and call it a day.
 
2012-01-30 03:08:27 PM
I'll vote to fund this:
www.oocities.org

If they can guarantee the women will dress like this:
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-01-30 03:08:53 PM

Rich Cream: 1. I'm sure in the 1960s there were plenty of lists of reasons why we could never put a man on the moon. Still used to "prove" we never went.

2. The entire point of the Space Station is to prove (and learn how) man can exist in a hostile environments like the moon and long space travel.

So fark off.

/not defending Newt, puhleaze




I think the point of TFA, and most of the criticism about his idea, was more that Newt's idea was disingenuous at best. I think a moon base would certainly be a great idea, but one by 2020 sounds extremely optimistic and generally unrealistic. I think a serious consideration for a project would also require us to rethink our standing in the world (at the very least in terms of how we're spending our money) to the point where I wouldn't bet on any current Republican to deliver on that idea.
 
2012-01-30 03:08:58 PM
Why all this hate on Newt and Moon Pies? I love Moon Pies!
 
2012-01-30 03:09:59 PM

timujin: Newt being a dingbat notwithstanding, I do have at least one issue with the article:

It took more than $100 billion to manufacture a white elephant in near-Earth orbit called the International Space Station, a large, smelly metal can that to date has produced no science, no manufacturing, and tourism that only billionaires could afford

No science? (warning: PDF, pops)


Quantum Apostrophe will be along shortly to tell you that any science output would have been done terrestrially by some other entity and that the space station was and is a complete waste of humanity's resources and will never, ever produce anything useful. Ever.
 
2012-01-30 03:11:52 PM
A Republican suggesting scientific advancement? That's don't make any cents.
 
2012-01-30 03:11:58 PM
My Anaheim Electronics stock is up because of this.
 
2012-01-30 03:11:59 PM
He's stealing a forecast from George Friedman's (the STRATFOR guy) book "The Next Hundred Years." According to Friedman, moon colonization is feasible, if not inevitable... 30 or 40 or even 50 years from now, not anywhere in the near future.

/ I loathe Newt and this plan will never leave the ground. Clear pandering.
 
2012-01-30 03:12:33 PM
fark putting men on the moon until we figure out how to put every man in a house.
 
2012-01-30 03:12:34 PM

Guntram Shatterhand: I'm still laughing at how fast Gingrich burned out. This moonbase idea would be a good idea if the Republican Party 1) hadn't sunk the economy and 2) created a political divide based on choosing religion over science. Exactly how is a GOP candidate that panders to the Jesus Crowd going to find a trillion dollars to invest in SCIENCE, again?

The whole thing is silly. Gingrich's false sincerity doesn't help him in the way he thinks it does. If anything, it just lost him Florida while giving both Romney and the Democrats perfect ways to undermine anything he'll ever do again while proving that Teabaggers aren't even in their right minds. They can't even be consistent enough in their own 'belief' system.


Someone should really start a project to fly astronaut to the moon through the power of prayer.
 
2012-01-30 03:13:50 PM

timujin: Newt being a dingbat notwithstanding, I do have at least one issue with the article:

It took more than $100 billion to manufacture a white elephant in near-Earth orbit called the International Space Station, a large, smelly metal can that to date has produced no science, no manufacturing, and tourism that only billionaires could afford

No science? (warning: PDF, pops)


Science to the layperson means consumer technology. In short, they want all of the gadgets they saw on Star Trek. Research and discovery don't count.
 
2012-01-30 03:14:15 PM
I don't want to be mistaken for someone who opposes space exploration. A serious plan to establish sustainable human colonies on the moon, Mars, and beyond would be exciting. I just don't see it happening without a willingness to shovel several hundred billion dollars into a furnace without any expectation of return. It's about as risky and resource-intensive an operation as we can cook up, and opportunities to extract resources from the whole thing will be a side effect of the big exploration experiments - new and improved space propulsion systems, better radiation-hardened computers, long-term self-sustaining habitats, and so on. The sunk costs will be in-farking-credible, and unless Newtie intends to backstop the whole thing with T-bills and debt, it's exceedingly unlikely any combination of today's aerospace companies will be willing to hang their necks out there to finance the mess. The shareholders would riot, for one thing.
 
2012-01-30 03:15:50 PM

FightDirector: Masso: What we need is a large interplanetary self-sustaining migration spaceship capable of transforming into giant robot with particle cannon gun for self defense, escorted by fleets of fighters capable of transforming into different modes for different combat environments to handle possible giant hostile humanoid aliens.

I like your plan, but I feel that such a plan is going to need something else. Perhaps a chinzy musical accompaniment and a pointless love triangle composed of three incredibly annoying characters.


/whole thing should have been about Roy and Max, with Miriya thrown in halfway through. Keep Gloval and the Bridge bunnies and call it a day.


The later ones got Yoko Kanno, though, so the music is infinitely better.
 
2012-01-30 03:16:51 PM

DarnoKonrad: Low earth orbit is a vital component of Earth's economy -- but it has practically nothing to do with the actual physical presence of human beings in low earth orbit -- much less the moon


Except for all those missions leading up to Apollo where we were testing out different rocket designs and learning how to send people into Earth orbit, your statement makes complete sense.
 
2012-01-30 03:17:51 PM

PlatinumDragon: I don't want to be mistaken for someone who opposes space exploration. A serious plan to establish sustainable human colonies on the moon, Mars, and beyond would be exciting. I just don't see it happening without a willingness to shovel several hundred billion dollars into a furnace without any expectation of return. It's about as risky and resource-intensive an operation as we can cook up, and opportunities to extract resources from the whole thing will be a side effect of the big exploration experiments - new and improved space propulsion systems, better radiation-hardened computers, long-term self-sustaining habitats, and so on. The sunk costs will be in-farking-credible, and unless Newtie intends to backstop the whole thing with T-bills and debt, it's exceedingly unlikely any combination of today's aerospace companies will be willing to hang their necks out there to finance the mess. The shareholders would riot, for one thing.


Mike the Computer could help.
 
2012-01-30 03:17:51 PM
In all fairness to Newt, he doesn't really believe that we need a moon base. He's just pandering to the aerospace employees in FL.

Newt has all of the commitment of a 5-year-old with ADD. He would be fun as a president: every day a new kooky idea. And this former community college instructor fashions himself as the Republican "big thinker in chief".

Just look at what he's trotted out in the primaries:
* the "Cuban spring" to match the "Arab spring"
* lunatic bases
* Romney's a "European socialist" but we must back Israeli socialism
* shoot lasers at North Korea
* allow a terrorist attack to succeed (new window)once in a while just to keep people terrorized
 
2012-01-30 03:18:03 PM

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: Know who else thought it would be a good idea to go to the moon?


Yes, but he was a DEMOCRAT!

/Its almost assured that some day in the near future, someone will build a moon base.
/I wonder if the logical thinking and sane people looking up from the ground will still feel like they are wearing their pants on their bottoms.
 
2012-01-30 03:19:29 PM

monoski: Newt was pandering to NASA employees and the economy that made a living off of them.

//That is all


That might be what he was trying to do, but NASA employees know just how stupid and unrealistic his idea is.
 
2012-01-30 03:20:10 PM

PlatinumDragon: I don't want to be mistaken for someone who opposes space exploration. A serious plan to establish sustainable human colonies on the moon, Mars, and beyond would be exciting. I just don't see it happening without a willingness to shovel several hundred billion dollars into a furnace without any expectation of return. It's about as risky and resource-intensive an operation as we can cook up, and opportunities to extract resources from the whole thing will be a side effect of the big exploration experiments - new and improved space propulsion systems, better radiation-hardened computers, long-term self-sustaining habitats, and so on. The sunk costs will be in-farking-credible, and unless Newtie intends to backstop the whole thing with T-bills and debt, it's exceedingly unlikely any combination of today's aerospace companies will be willing to hang their necks out there to finance the mess. The shareholders would riot, for one thing.



That's pretty much the argument for space exploration being the purview of the government, right there.

If it's going to happen at all, then the government HAS to do it, because absent a guaranteed return on the tremendous investment, no-one else will.
 
2012-01-30 03:20:26 PM

bmwericus: Of course it's expensive, and since there's no one but a few space nuts like myself will actually support this initiative regardless of who proposes it...well, to paraphrase Luke Skywalker "I'm never getting off this [farking] rock!".

We should do it just because we believe that going to the stars might give meaning to our little lives, and I mean whilst we are alive, not in company of some theoretical sky wizard.

A lunar Colony would teach us much about long duration space flight without having to be IN free space - you know, vacuum engineering, hydroponics, air conditioning [which includes O2 management], water, etc. A Colony would be able to have multiply redundant systems and would be able to build and test new stuff all the time, perfecting the systems in a real life environment. "Space walking" or going on the surface would have to become a bit more routine, and we would develop transportation systems....etc. etc.

Imagine a "flying Bedstead" on the moon.

Gives me wood just thinking about the opportunities.


I would agree with your sentiment but not the target. We CAN do all those things on Mars - quite practically, and with current technology. We cannot ever feasibly do them on the Moon, likely ever, and even if we could we wouldn't want to.


Short lesson from someone who helps design this stuff;
Moon=No way, ever.
Mars=Feasible
Self-sustaining orbital colonies=Feasible
 
2012-01-30 03:20:35 PM
Two words: gravity well.
 
2012-01-30 03:21:47 PM

way south: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: Know who else thought it would be a good idea to go to the moon?

Yes, but he was a DEMOCRAT!

/Its almost assured that some day in the near future, someone will build a moon base.
/I wonder if the logical thinking and sane people looking up from the ground will still feel like they are wearing their pants on their bottoms.


The logical thinking and sane people will be the ones who build it. We just know it can't be done in eight years without throwing half the US budget at it (and maybe not even then). It'll happen, no doubt -- though I'd rather it be a Lagrange point colony than a lunar base.
 
2012-01-30 03:22:21 PM

StrangeQ: DarnoKonrad: Low earth orbit is a vital component of Earth's economy -- but it has practically nothing to do with the actual physical presence of human beings in low earth orbit -- much less the moon

Except for all those missions leading up to Apollo where we were testing out different rocket designs and learning how to send people into Earth orbit, your statement makes complete sense.



Actually, that had a lot more to do with regularly testing ICBMs under the guise of a peaceful program.
 
Displayed 50 of 226 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report