Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
Richard Branson’s space flight
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="embee" data-source="post: 8340799" data-attributes="member: 7026827"><p>First of all, let's clarify some things. Branson's flight was a Vomit Comet. That's all. Spaceship Two doesn't reach the Karman Line. It's the TWA plane from 2001. </p><p></p><p>Musk and Bezos, meanwhile, keep talking about self-sustaining extraterrestrial colonies without acknowledging that for the remainder of the century, at the very least, they will be not be self-sustaining. So, in order for those colonies to exist, Earth will continue to need to be habitable and able to spend resources <strong><u>both</u></strong> on climate management and mitigation in addition to space exploration and colonization. </p><p></p><p>There are a lot of preliminary steps that are being either elided or willfully ignored. </p><p></p><p>You ask:</p><p></p><p>"Is space development, which is arguably a positive for the economy even over the short term, and which is a massive boon for planetary science and climate science, really the place to raise moral objections?"</p><p></p><p>Yes.</p><p></p><p>Let's address the economic questions first...</p><p></p><p>First, who's economy? The United States is not the only nation on Earth, nor is it the most important. I say that as an American. </p><p></p><p>Second, define "the economy." Are you talking about employment? Are you talking about inflation? What do you mean by "the economy"? </p><p></p><p>Three, define "short term." Are we talking about increased employment and consumer spending over a one-year period? A five-year period? What is "short term"? </p><p></p><p>Four, is "the economy" more important than the ability of the planet to continue supporting 8 billion human beings?</p><p></p><p>Five, what type of economy are you talking about? Are you talking about the continuation of a consumer economy predicated on the manufacture and sale of semi-disposable goods? Is "the economy" of which you speak sustainable for more than the next 50 years?</p><p></p><p>Six, is the benefit to "the economy" from reusable rocket technology a greater benefit than the benefit to "the economy" from climate mitigation and environmental research? Do you know who has had a terrible month so far? Insurance companies, real estate investors, and pretty much anyone involved with the sale or ownership of real estate. Because right now, no one really knows whether billions of dollars of insured property will soon be ash, dust, or under water. </p><p></p><p>An oceanfront condo building in Miami collapsed and every single insurance company and real estate company is praying that it was due to poor maintenance and not because of climate change. On the west coast, wildfire season is starting to be year-round, and everything west of the Rockies is under drought conditions. </p><p></p><p>If you want to put this in economic terms, then you have to look at how increased temperatures and severe drought has imploded the ski industry supports Utah, Wyoming, Nevada, Colorado, and California. No snow means no skiing. And these are seasonal businesses that can only go a couple of years before they go bankrupt. Or look at the almond industry. 80% of the world's almonds grow in California. And the latest multi-year drought is forcing growers to either fallow other crops to divert water to almond orchards or to start culling almond trees altogether. Meanwhile, wildfires, in addition to burning homes and businesses (including farms), have also caused insurance costs to rise beyond the reach of many, including, for example wineries, another pillar of California's economy. So now you have people and businesses that are a flame away from collapse. </p><p></p><p>So, is space exploration a greater benefit to the economy than reversing or mitigating the effects of global climate change? I say no.</p><p></p><p>So, inasmuch as I do not believe that space exploration represents a net economic positive over climate research and development, your basic premise fails. </p><p></p><p>Seven, is the current approach by Mssrs. Bezos and Musk moral - to wit, a focus on reusable rocket technology with little to no research on terraforming. Both have stated their goals as space colonization. Musk's approach to terraforming is, and I wish I was kidding, to launch all of Earth's nuclear missiles at Mars to release enough CO2 into its atmosphere to capture and retain heat. Basically Total Recall. Meanwhile, Bezos' plan is to have everyone live forever on Rama ships and to just abandon terrestrial life, using moons and asteroid mining for resources. </p><p></p><p>Seven, are either of these approaches moral where such would almost certainly come at the cost of millions, if not billions, of human lives and the extinction of countless species? </p><p></p><p>The cart, right now, is in front of the horse. Until we can learn how to continue to have life on Earth, I say that space races like this are wrong. They do not substantially advance the existing research while simultaneously promoting the wrong belief that the immediate dangers to life, and yes, the economy, are less important than some vague undefined idea of space colonization. </p><p></p><p>As to Mr Branson, I ask this...</p><p></p><p>Given the decades-long history of failed promises by Mr Branson, is there any proof that his stated goal of "space tourism" - along with his willingness to take non-refundable deposits on flights that have yet to occur - is anything more than a fancy grift?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="embee, post: 8340799, member: 7026827"] First of all, let's clarify some things. Branson's flight was a Vomit Comet. That's all. Spaceship Two doesn't reach the Karman Line. It's the TWA plane from 2001. Musk and Bezos, meanwhile, keep talking about self-sustaining extraterrestrial colonies without acknowledging that for the remainder of the century, at the very least, they will be not be self-sustaining. So, in order for those colonies to exist, Earth will continue to need to be habitable and able to spend resources [B][U]both[/U][/B] on climate management and mitigation in addition to space exploration and colonization. There are a lot of preliminary steps that are being either elided or willfully ignored. You ask: "Is space development, which is arguably a positive for the economy even over the short term, and which is a massive boon for planetary science and climate science, really the place to raise moral objections?" Yes. Let's address the economic questions first... First, who's economy? The United States is not the only nation on Earth, nor is it the most important. I say that as an American. Second, define "the economy." Are you talking about employment? Are you talking about inflation? What do you mean by "the economy"? Three, define "short term." Are we talking about increased employment and consumer spending over a one-year period? A five-year period? What is "short term"? Four, is "the economy" more important than the ability of the planet to continue supporting 8 billion human beings? Five, what type of economy are you talking about? Are you talking about the continuation of a consumer economy predicated on the manufacture and sale of semi-disposable goods? Is "the economy" of which you speak sustainable for more than the next 50 years? Six, is the benefit to "the economy" from reusable rocket technology a greater benefit than the benefit to "the economy" from climate mitigation and environmental research? Do you know who has had a terrible month so far? Insurance companies, real estate investors, and pretty much anyone involved with the sale or ownership of real estate. Because right now, no one really knows whether billions of dollars of insured property will soon be ash, dust, or under water. An oceanfront condo building in Miami collapsed and every single insurance company and real estate company is praying that it was due to poor maintenance and not because of climate change. On the west coast, wildfire season is starting to be year-round, and everything west of the Rockies is under drought conditions. If you want to put this in economic terms, then you have to look at how increased temperatures and severe drought has imploded the ski industry supports Utah, Wyoming, Nevada, Colorado, and California. No snow means no skiing. And these are seasonal businesses that can only go a couple of years before they go bankrupt. Or look at the almond industry. 80% of the world's almonds grow in California. And the latest multi-year drought is forcing growers to either fallow other crops to divert water to almond orchards or to start culling almond trees altogether. Meanwhile, wildfires, in addition to burning homes and businesses (including farms), have also caused insurance costs to rise beyond the reach of many, including, for example wineries, another pillar of California's economy. So now you have people and businesses that are a flame away from collapse. So, is space exploration a greater benefit to the economy than reversing or mitigating the effects of global climate change? I say no. So, inasmuch as I do not believe that space exploration represents a net economic positive over climate research and development, your basic premise fails. Seven, is the current approach by Mssrs. Bezos and Musk moral - to wit, a focus on reusable rocket technology with little to no research on terraforming. Both have stated their goals as space colonization. Musk's approach to terraforming is, and I wish I was kidding, to launch all of Earth's nuclear missiles at Mars to release enough CO2 into its atmosphere to capture and retain heat. Basically Total Recall. Meanwhile, Bezos' plan is to have everyone live forever on Rama ships and to just abandon terrestrial life, using moons and asteroid mining for resources. Seven, are either of these approaches moral where such would almost certainly come at the cost of millions, if not billions, of human lives and the extinction of countless species? The cart, right now, is in front of the horse. Until we can learn how to continue to have life on Earth, I say that space races like this are wrong. They do not substantially advance the existing research while simultaneously promoting the wrong belief that the immediate dangers to life, and yes, the economy, are less important than some vague undefined idea of space colonization. As to Mr Branson, I ask this... Given the decades-long history of failed promises by Mr Branson, is there any proof that his stated goal of "space tourism" - along with his willingness to take non-refundable deposits on flights that have yet to occur - is anything more than a fancy grift? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
Richard Branson’s space flight
Top