You do know that was my point, right? At present it’s not specifically illegal, and the only way for that to happen is for their government to enact a law specifically stating it is illegal.
And those scum, the dog “farmers” have no business being on any panel regarding the issue.
What a nice bit of spin. The Titan submersible couldn’t be certified because no one is an expert in carbon fiber subs. Innovators have to take risks, and exploration is dangerous, but by golly, we have to take the chance, for humanity’s sake! Söhnleinm sounded this close to saying “mistakes were made.”
I’m sure he’d prefer we all did.
It wouldn’t be a colony on the surface but a floating colony ~35 miles up, where the air temperature and pressure would be quite similar to Earth’s. Still have to deal with sulfuric acid but nothing would be submerged in acid.
That’s not actually totally ridiculous. Scientists have been proposing similar concepts for 40-50 years.
That said, this doofus is about the last person I want involved in any such attempt. There’s no way you could trust they did their engineering due diligence. That’s before we get to the problem of transporting 1000 people to a different planet in less than 30 years, much less the engineering challenge of building and transporting a cloud city for them to inhabit.
And they really believe nothing will ever go wrong and that they’ll always be approximately 35 miles above the surface?
Thank you.
Not just an engineering challenge, in the standard sense of how to get the materials together and the city to stay up there. We still don’t know how to build an enclosed environment that works long-term. When we can do that on Earth, we can try doing it in nearby space, close enough to get the inhabitants back within a few days if necessary. When we can get it to work in nearby space, we can try doing it on relatively nearby planets. If they were starting at the beginning of that and saying ‘we can get through this process within 30 years’ I’d still be dubious; but if they’re saying ‘Oh, we can go straight to Venus, we don’t need to do any of that first’ – anybody buying a ticket on that ride is definitely not thinking clearly.
The NASA proposal linked to isn’t for a colony but for experimental stations, and starts with robotic presence only, then with humans staying for only 30 days at a time, then possibly for a year, then possibly a permanent presence – with the implication seeming to be that you don’t move on to stage 2 until you can make stage 1 work, and you don’t move on to stage 3 until and unless you can make stage 2 work, and so on. At this point we’re at about the one-year stage for near space with frequent resupply from Earth during that time, aren’t we?
Who is “they”?
If you mean NASA, of course not, which is why their proposed testing for crewed missions occurs across several phases, of which we haven’t even gotten to Phase 1 yet. Permanent habitation is pie in the sky thinking for them at the moment.
If you mean the jackass over at Oceangate, I wouldn’t trust that guy to build a puppy enclosure, much less an interplanetary colony ship.
Yes, but my point was that the notion of a Venusian colony is not automatically subject to ridicule because of the surface conditions on Venus, as suggested by the post above. A Venusian colony is actually something that is plausible, albeit incredibly difficult, even without positing exotic materials or technologies we’re centuries away from achieving.
The more ridiculous notion is that anybody at Oceangate should be trusted within hundreds of miles of any projects or plans that could remotely be involved
Unless it’s going to rely on frequent resupply from Earth, then it requires the technology of building an enclosed self-sustaining ecology which can support humans. Which we haven’t managed yet to do even on Earth’s surface. Whether we’re centuries away from doing it I have no idea, and I don’t think anybody else does either.
For an experimental station to rely on frequent resupply from Earth is one thing. For a colony to do so, at any significant distance, is another matter. Possibly also doable – but removes most of the apparent motivation for doing such a thing in the first place.
Line up these morons and march them into the ships. And send letters back saying how wonderful it is.
And, thanks in part to his company, nice safe status quo sounds pretty good.
Require that the CEO/Board of Directors and anyone who signs off on this shit has to be on board. Problem solved one way or the other.
That did not keep the Titan safe.
He may have have a point that putting 1,000 people on Venus by 2050 isn’t as ludicrous as putting 1,000,000 people on Mars by 2050. In the sense that 99.99% ludicrous is less than 100% ludicrous.
But that idiot won’t make that mistake again. And maybe the next guy will learn a lesson. It’s a process.
I get the feeling this guy read Heinlein’s Between Planets as a youngster and never stopped believing in that Venus.
Or “It’s all the Democrats’ fault that Trump ate my face!”.
All of that is true at the surface. At cloudtop height, though, it’s surprisingly hospitable: The temperature and atmospheric pressure are both within the range of human comfort, and the gravity would be close to what we’re used to. You’d still need an enclosed environment to maintain a breathable atmosphere, but it wouldn’t have to withstand a pressure difference, and leaks would be very slow.
That said, of course, we’re not yet ready for any offworld permanent human presence, and Venus is at best third place on the list of where to put one.
Typical. Sacrifice the robots first to make it safe for humans.
And with that terrible pain in all the diodes down their left sides.
Sometimes, the Venus robots get the upper…uh…hand (arm?)
That’s what humans consider entertainment, a robot and a cyborg fighting each other to the death?
You people are sick.