# Will we live to see a permanent human presence in outer space? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 29, 2005, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606 "2005-12-29T18:39:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606/41 "2005-12-30T02:57:11Z")
> [@Sam Stone](#): > > Moller’s a real engineer (and I believe he means well), but his claims fall into the ‘eccentric inventor’ category, and that’s being charitable. Indeed. I recall coming across the Sky Car in (IIRC) the late 1980s, when it was the next great idea, and just about to become operational. Not much seems to be different today. ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606/42 "2005-12-30T03:08:17Z")
Well 30 years ago I used to dream about what it would be like to have a huge, room-sized personal super-computer at my disposal. What a silly dream. Oh, wait. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606/43 "2005-12-30T03:08:30Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > Oh now that’s a bunch of baloney and you know it. 😛 Our whole system is based on private business doing things better and cheaper than the government. No, **lev,** the American **political culture** is biased towards private-sector action as the default position, whereas government action is what you always have to make a case for. That’s tradition. That the private sector often (by no means always) is more economically efficient than the public is incidental. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 3:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606/44 "2005-12-30T03:15:16Z")
> [@Malodorous](#): > > Anyways I’d imagine most of the ISS was built by private contractors. Strictly speaking, all of the ISS modules were built by private contractors, albeit with funds from the public coffers. NASA builds virtually no spaceflight hardware of their own. Ditto for the ESA, and the Russian Space Agency is essentially a clearinghouse for private contractors who actually run the operational aspects of their space program as well as built the hardware. In any case, Scaled Composites’ suborbital flights scarcely qualify as space tourism on the scale that compares in any way to a permanent human presence. I’d love to see a permanent human presence in space, and I think it would be of eventual great benefit to mankind, but a cost-effective effort is going to require both technological and political breakthroughs. The technological ones are straightforward but require significant development: a cheap, reliable ground-to-orbit capability for both personnel and heavy cargo; a habitat system capable of synthecizing gravity via rotation and providing shielding against solar and cosmic radiation outside of the Earth’s magnetosphere (for orbits above LEO); a propulsion system that allows high specific impulse, long duration thrust; self-enclosed environmental systems; and the necessary mining, energy generating, or other technologies to make a presence economically sustainable. There are resources in space–even in near planetary orbit–to fundamentally alter our world economy in ways we are barely even able to consider. But being able to extract these resources, while not an insurmountable challenge, will require decades of not only advancement of technology but also of manufacturing and processing methods in a free-fall, vacuum environment. Some will, as **Liberal** does, poo-poo human presence with the argument that the hazards are too great. Such arguments should not be dismissed out of hand; it is certainly no exaggeration to say that environmental failure or exposure to a solar flare can be immediately lethal. But there are ways of mitigating these hazards; despite the fact that the RMS _Titanic_ broke apart and sank, killing more than 1500 people, we have since built larger cruise ships that ply the North Sea without catastrophe. Safe spaceflight and space habitation is a matter of gaining a better understanding and appreciation for the potential hazard and building systems that are as fail-safe as possible; comparing the current state of the art and safety record to the potential future is like comparing travelling around the South Pacific in a canoe to sailing 'round the world in the QM II. As for the political issue; this is far more damning. Such an effort requires a consistant policy and support, as well as an agenda based not upon mere showmanship, stunt missions, or one-upping the Joneskis (or the Chans) but on a continuous effort to expand, develop, and improve, with the ultimate goal of making space habitation not only economically viable but preferred for resource extraction (mining) and heavy or polluting industry. One questions whether any goverment has the wherewithall to sustain such an effort over a long term, and private industry has to show profits on their quarterlies in order to maintain investor confidence. Someone will, someday (or humanity will be wiped out by some catastrophic disaster, possibly of our own making). But will it be in our lifetimes? It seems unlikely at this point. JM$.02 Stranger ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606/45 "2005-12-30T14:49:44Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > Seriously though, and not that I’m a fan of gov’t funded space exploration, but haven’t there already been several “aw-shits”, yet we’re still sending people up? Up less than the distance from Charlotte to Atlanta, sure. But the OP is asking about a _permanent_ human presence in _outer_ space. That means a completely self-sustaining population that can cope with things like bullet sized meteors smashing into its protective structures at 50 kilometers per second. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606/46 "2005-12-30T15:09:24Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Up less than the distance from Charlotte to Atlanta, sure. But the OP is asking about a _permanent_ human presence in _outer_ space. That means a completely self-sustaining population that can cope with things like bullet sized meteors smashing into its protective structures at 50 kilometers per second. No . . . a “completely self-sustaining population” would be a population of humans who were born in space, intend to spend their whole lives and raise their own families in space (or at least on planets other than Earth), and who could survive, at least for a time, if cut off from all contact with Earth. And I hope that will exist one day. But for purposes of this thread, I’m not aiming so high. See the OP. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606/47 "2005-12-30T16:44:44Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > See the OP. I reject the premise that self-sustaining equates to aboriginal. An iron pebble will puncture the shielding of native and visitor alike. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606/48 "2005-12-30T17:53:06Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > An iron pebble will puncture the shielding of native and visitor alike. So it will. Is there any technical solution to that? ---
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606/49 "2005-12-30T18:15:39Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > Well 30 years ago I used to dream about what it would be like to have a huge, room-sized personal super-computer at my disposal. Even back then, you (and many others) had better plans than “tourism” for such computers. ---
**Author:** ![scotandrsn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a4c791/32.png) [@scotandrsn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scotandrsn)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606/50 "2005-12-30T18:18:47Z")
> [@Barbarian](#): > > No research is done on the ISS, and the only “science” done on shuttle missions is stuff you see at a high school science fair. This is complete horseshit. From the [Expedition 12 Press Kit(PDF)](http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/135404main_exp12_presskit.pdf), pp. 39ff: > [@](#): > > Experiments Using On-board Resources > > Many experiments from earlier Expeditions remain on board the space station and will continue to benefit from the long-term research platform provided by the orbiting laboratory. These experiments include: > > Crew Earth Observations (CEO) takes advantage of the crew in space to observe and photograph natural and human-made changes on Earth. The photographs record the Earth’s surface changes over time, as well as more fleeting events such as storms, floods, fires and volcanic eruptions. Together they provide researchers on Earth with vital, continuous images needed to better understand the planet. > > Materials on the International Space Station Experiment 5 (MISSE 5) is a suitcasesized experiment attached to the outside of the space station during a spacewalk on the STS-114 mission. It exposes hundreds of potential space construction materials to the harsh environment of space. The samples will be returned to Earth for study during a later expedition. Investigators will use the resulting data to design stronger, more durable spacecraft. > > Space Acceleration Measurement System II (SAMS-II) and Microgravity > Acceleration Measurement System (MAMS) sensors measure vibrations caused by > crew, equipment and other sources that could disturb microgravity experiments. > > Investigating the Structure of Paramagnetic Aggregates from Colloidal Emulsions > (InSPACE) seeks to obtain basic data on magnetorheological fluids – fluids that > respond to magnetic forces. This new class of “smart materials” can be used to > improve or develop new brake systems, seat suspensions, robotics, clutches, airplane landing gear and vibration damper systems. Samples for this experiment on board the station can be processed inside the Microgravity Science Glovebox facility, an enclosed work area that allows the crew to work safely with these fluids. > > Education Payload Operations (EPO) includes educational activities that will > demonstrate science, mathematics, technology, engineering and geography principles. EPO is designed to support the NASA mission to inspire the next generation of explorers. > > For the Cell Biotechnology Operations Support Systems Fluid Dynamics > Investigation (CBOSS - FDI), crewmembers will conduct a fluid-mixing test using > CBOSS fluid samples. CBOSS is used to grow three-dimensional tissue that retains the form and function of natural living tissue. This capability could lend insight in studying human diseases, including various types of cancer, diabetes, heart disease and AIDS. A critical step in performing these cell experiments involves mixing fluids. These fluid-mixing tests will be conducted to improve future experiments. > > Binary Colloidal Alloy Test – 3 (BCAT – 3) will study the long-term behavior of > colloids – a system of fine particles suspended in a fluid – in a microgravity > environment, where the effects of sedimentation and convection are removed. > Crewmembers will evenly mix the samples, photograph the growth and formations of the colloids, and downlink the images for analysis. > > Earth Knowledge Acquired by Middle School Students (EarthKAM), an education > experiment, allows middle school students to program a digital camera on board the station to photograph a variety of geographical targets for study in the classroom. > > Capillary Flow Experiment (CFE), a suite of fluid physics flight experiments, will study how fluids behave in space. Since fluids behave differently in low gravity, this information will be valuable for engineers designing spacecraft cooling systems, life support systems and the many other types of equipment that use fluids to operate. > > The Protein Crystal Growth Monitoring by Digital Holographic Microscope for the > International Space Station (PromISS 4) investigation uses a microscope to visualize the protein crystal growth process in microgravity. Protein crystals are grown in microgravity to help researchers study proteins, an effort that could aid in the development of new drugs to fight diseases. > > Human Life Science Investigations > > Measurements of Expedition 12 crewmembers will be used to study changes in the body caused by exposure to the microgravity environment for many continuing > experiments, including: > > Promoting Sensorimotor Response to Generalizability: A Countermeasure to > Mitigate Locomotor Dysfunction After Long-Duration Spaceflight (Mobility) studies > changes in posture and gait after long-duration spaceflight. Study results are expected to help in developing an in-flight treadmill training program for station crewmembers. The program could facilitate rapid recovery of functional mobility after long-duration spaceflight. > > Behavioral Issues Associated with Isolation and Confinement: Review and > Analysis of Astronaut Journals obtains information on behavioral and human factors related to the design of the equipment and procedures. It also monitors sustained human performance during long-duration missions. > > Foot/Ground Reaction Forces During Space Flight (Foot) studies the load on the > lower body and muscle activity in crewmembers working on the station. This study will provide better understanding of lower-extremity bone and muscle loss experienced by astronauts in microgravity. The results of this experiment will help in planning future space flights and offers the potential to help better understand, prevent and treat osteoporosis – a disease occurring mostly in women where the bones become fragile, break easily and heal slowly – on Earth. > > The Renal Stone experiment collects urine samples from the crew and tests a possible countermeasure for preventing kidney stone formation. Pages 32ff of the [STS-107 Press Kit(PDF)](http://www.shuttlepresskit.com/STS-107/STS-107_SPK.pdf), the final flight of Columbia, is dripping with experiments. Granted, some them are in fact high school science experiments, but providing a platfom for students to conduct such experiments is exactly what I would expect of a government space agency. > [@Barbarian](#): > > We’ll have permanent space colonies when one of two things happen: 1) a bunch of billionaires decide to leave the planet, its taxes, and its terrorists behind, or 2) a mining consortium decides its cheaper to set up operations in the asteroid belt and ferry metals to Earth. I disagree. I believe the lure of space tourism will turn a profit, once critical safety issues are worked out. ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606/51 "2005-12-30T19:04:17Z")
> [@Xema](#): > > Even back then, you (and many others) had better plans than “tourism” for such computers. I suppose we thought computers would cure cancer or something, but as it turns out, they’re really just good for fragging bad guys in Halo tournaments. Such with space. Maybe someone will develop a new medicine utilizing “zero gravity” but the real money’s going to be in zero gee sex, and lunar spelunking. ---
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606/52 "2005-12-30T19:14:41Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > I suppose we thought computers would cure cancer or something, but as it turns out, they’re really just good for fragging bad guys in Halo tournaments. To be fair, there are a few other applications. I’ll be happy to grant that if a way is found to drive the cost of space travel down in a way comparable to what’s been done with computing power, then we’re in luck. I don’t see quite how this will happen, but then few people saw it with computers 30 years ago. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606/53 "2005-12-30T19:22:04Z")
> [@Xema](#): > > I’ll be happy to grant that if a way is found to drive the cost of space travel down in a way comparable to what’s been done with computing power, then we’re in luck. There is a way: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space\_elevator](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_elevator) Of course, it still needs a little work . . . ---
**Author:** ![jimmmy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/73ab20/32.png) [@jimmmy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jimmmy)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606/54 "2005-12-30T20:48:29Z")
Hey! I wanna be the rock hard realist and not the guy in tights spreading fairy dust about our Star Trek future … but my role in this thread isn’t playing out that way. _reaching for my dust_ To me the big difference between the Government vs. Private is that all Private has to do is provide light, heat and windows. The Government needs extensive scientific justification. For instance, taking the the ISS as an example (where we always go for cost comaprisons) we really just need the initial mission in order to have a place were a few Millionaires can rotate out on a permanant basis. Further, no one has mentioned [Bigelow](http://www.space.com/news/bigelow_update_041124.html) I don’t know if it is because we think it is pie in the sky (hehe) or what - but when we step back and look at it we have a major airline planning tourist flights to space and a major hotel chain with what looks like a realistic chance to put humans permanently into space in the next decade – maybe not (ever) the 50 in the OP – but, again, live to see I am taking as the next 50 years – that timeline is greater than the time-space from 1956 (pre-orbit, pre-NASA itself) to now. 50 years has proven to be a long time in flight and space technology . From a (rah-rah) website Bigelow’s [plan](http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0409/27bigelow/) \*Robert Bigelow says when he started the project in 1998 he decided he could afford to put $500 million of his own funds into the effort by 2015 to achieve launch of full-scale hardware by then. He says, however, that developments at his North Las Vegas plant and at his nearly two dozen subcontractors have put him as much as five years ahead of schedule, with at least the chance of launching the first 20-25-ton Nautilus for unmanned tests by 2008 and placing a crew on board that first unit as early as 2010. \* Throw in the liklihood somebody is going to throw manned bases on the moon/in orbit and again, I say “Yes” ---
**Author:** ![jimmmy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/73ab20/32.png) [@jimmmy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jimmmy)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606/55 "2005-12-30T20:49:54Z")
> [@jimmmy](#): > > Throw in the liklihood somebody is going to throw manned bases on the moon/in orbit and again, I say “Yes” :smack: the liklihood somebody is going to throw manned **MILITARY** bases on the moon/in orbit and again, ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606/56 "2005-12-30T21:03:04Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > So it will. Is there any technical solution to that? Yes. I mentioned it in the other threads. The moon is littered wth lava tubes. The ‘rilles’ you see on the moon are Lava tubes that collapsed while the moon was still geologically active. But it’s assumed that there are still plenty of them left, and now that the moon is geologically stable they will last for millions of years. Some could be near the surface, others could be miles below the surface. They could be hundreds of feet in diameter and miles long. If we could find a suitable tube, big enough for a large habitation but small enough to be able to work with, we could coat the inside with a barrier, fill it with air and heat it. Voila - an underground city where hundreds or even thousands of people could live. According to the cite below, the largest ones could be half a mile in diameter and hundreds of miles long - large enough for a million people. They would be protected from solar radiation and micro-meteorites. If we can find enough water on the moon, we can create an atmosphere and provide water for farming and drinking. It’s not too hard to imagine a colony in such a place that is either self-sustaining or at least capable of providing for itself for several years without resupply. [See here for more details](http://www.asi.org/adb/m/04/02/01/02/) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606/57 "2005-12-30T21:36:47Z")
> [@Sam Stone](#): > > Yes. I mentioned it in the other threads. The moon is littered wth lava tubes. . . . That’s fine for a Lunar colony, but is there any way a free-floating colony or station could be reliably shielded from meteorites? ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606/58 "2005-12-30T22:02:43Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > That’s fine for a Lunar colony, but is there any way a free-floating colony or station could be reliably shielded from meteorites? Meteors (meteorites are actually meteors that have crashed on the surface of a planet or moon) are not quite the hazard they’re made out to be. There’s certainly a lot of them out there–the Earth is hit by millions a day–but most aren’t large enough to do more than surface cratering of hardened steel. Even the impact of a larger one isn’t necessarily going to be catastrophic; the dramatic flash and sound effects someone sees in a large meteor are due to compression of the atmosphere. Striking a hollow can, they’re likely to just punch through. One assumes that any large habitat is both going to be seperated into some kind of compartments and/or have the faculties for self-sealing repair. In any case, larger impacts are exceedingly rare; between Skylab, the Salyut stations, Mir, and the ISS, none have seen an impact which compromised environmental or structural integrity; the much greater concern is being struck by artificial orbital debris which trashes up Low Earth Orbit. Radiation, on the other hand, is a hazard that can’t just be sealed off; charged particles can be deflected by a strong magnetic field, of course, but uncharged radiation or highly energetic particles (cosmic radiation) can only be stopped by shielding–probably a combination of water, fluoidated boron, and massy (thick iron or lead) cladding. ([thread=346295]Here[/thread]'s a recent thread on radiation hazards in space.) By the time you’ve laid all that stuff up, you’re protected against small intrusions. Larger ones are just luck of the draw, but given that we’ve had great success in building vessels that travel hundreds of feed below the ocean’s surface withstanding thousands of psi of pressure, mitigating small punctures in spacecraft or habitats is not an insurmountable challenge. A big, fast one–the size of a basketball or larger–could do real, unpreventable, unrecoverable damage, but the incidence of such an impact is exceedingly rare in Earth-Luna system orbit. Long term–on the order of centuries–we’re going to have to figure out how to occupy space without bringing along all the extra water and proteins and requisite support systems that are such a mass-waste, but that gets into the realm of extreme speculation. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606/59 "2005-12-30T22:03:37Z")
Not without lots and lots of mass. ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2005, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606/60 "2005-12-30T22:27:01Z")
What **Stranger On A Train** said. Small meteor impacts will be dealt with by the thick shielding we’ll have to have anyway, due to the radiation. Larger impacts are so vanishingly rare as to be meaningless. Anything big enough to wipe you out is also detectable well in advance. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-we-live-to-see-a-permanent-human-presence-in-outer-space/337606.md?page=4)