When there is no future, all you have is the past. Though I will thoroughly relish watching the naive socialist and feminist children get their due in the end. And I think I may be alive long enough to see it.
"In 2010, British academic Bruce Charlton posited, “I suspect that human capability reached its peak or plateau around 1965-75 – at the time of the Apollo moon landings – and has been declining ever since:”"
What was the big change in society around that time? Hmmmm? Can't put my finger on it... Wait- could our decline be due to compromising and adopting feminism?
Yeah. I agree. It's kinda sad when you visit the Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville, AL and realize that Von Braun had plans to visit Mars using nuclear-powered rockets using 60s tech! Whoa!
Sigh. Just think what coulda happened if we'd spent money on visiting the stars rather than wasting money on the utopian project of bringing democracy to the Vietnamese.
Posted this on facebook with some commentary that genius works alone and educational credentialing means little unless it has solid, real world application...
Whew! Some angry neckbeards and 20-something women. They are all chasing their master's....and it means everything to them.
I refuse to send any traffic to that article about the kid. Mercy, live has gotten so easy for journalists that they deem it article worthy at FORBES to talk about gender vs. sex in CHILDREN.
Forbes has definitely declined in the last 20 years. So has the Economist. Both of these magazines were quite good during the late 80's (come to think of it, lots of things were good in the 80's). Journalism has declined so bad in the last 20 years. I no longer read any print magazines at all now.
A fellow named John Zubrin who worked at NASA during the first Bush administration published an excellent book outlining how to send manned missions to Mars with technology possessed in 1969 - no nuclear rockets required, either. It was called The Case for Mars; I'd link to it but I don't know how to ensure Cap gets the affiliate kickback.
I think theres a big distinction that should be made here: the fact that we haven't gone back to the moon isn't evidence that human capability is declining, its evidence that government capability is declining. Going to the moon was always a demonstration of the capability of the US government. I doubt there are many people out there, if any, who would claim that the US government was as competent and capable of leading its people as it was 40 years ago, largely because the societal changes that have taken place exploit their power primarily through the government.
For evidence of the health of human capability, just look at continued technological improvement by private enterprises. Private enterprise could never have made it to the moon in 1970 (wheres the profit?), but many other improvements to human lifestyle and human capabilities have come since then, and it looks increasingly likely that private enterprise will become the premier entity in space within the next 20 years.
I think my post got killed by the robot filter, but the whole "can't put a man on the moon" argument says nothing about HUMAN capability, but it says plenty about GOVERNMENT capability. I think few will argue that the government is run as well as it was 40 years ago.
Personally, I've never understood why outer space exploration is deemed the metric by which human progress is measured.
I can't help but think about people on the Moon, rovers on Mars, and not feel like we don't have more important things to be doing. Yes, it's cool, but does it really matter? Does knowing if there was ever life on Mars make my life any different, or even better?
Obviously these things are important in a pure research sense, but right now, it mostly feels like the realization of adolescent fantasy than useful science. More of a pissing contest than an actual accomplishment.
Its a only pissing contest if you believe we live in a closed system and colonizing space is impossible. If you believe in open systems, then space is the place.
Yes, we could be on Mars if we hadn't gone boyscouting in Vietnam, paid through the nose to lawyers and ex-wives and transferred trillions of dollars incubating a non-white underclass in every single western nation on earth.
But its also possible that some among us are already on Mars and our closed system/flat earth worldview will soon end.
The proof of how past we are: when Bush decided we were to go to the Moon again did we take out the Saturn V, CM, SM, and LM systems out and start work on mod 2 designs using modern electronics, maybe adding solar in addition to (or in place of one of) the fuel cells on the SM and so on?
No, we decided to design them all again with a super CM, super SM, super LM, and super Saturn V (sorry, Mars V).
Meanwhile, the Russians are still using the capsule system they developed for their failed moonshot. Of course, the modern Soyuz has a glass cockpit, re-usable re-entry module, and more usable volume for less weight (due to the three part instead of two part design). But such evolution is just too much for the new and improved US. Better to start something new and then give up.
We couldn't even bother to learn the 2 versus 3 part advantage which GE pitched to NASA in the early 60s. Not being sure of it when people are just inventing spacecraft in the mid-60s is one thing. After it has a 40 year track record and the third nation to put a man into space adopted it you ignore it because you're more interested is some personal vision than in achieving your goal.
We walked on the Moon when I was two. When I was a kid I wanted to be an astronaut more than anything. Now I'm 45 and we're hitching a ride from the people who couldn't even get to the Moon.
Oh, and the whole "math is hard and not worth it" attitude has nothing to do with us not doing things that make it worth learning anymore.
"In 2010, British academic Bruce Charlton posited, “I suspect that human capability reached its peak or plateau around 1965-75 – at the time of the Apollo moon landings – and has been declining ever since:”"
ReplyDeleteWhat was the big change in society around that time? Hmmmm? Can't put my finger on it... Wait- could our decline be due to compromising and adopting feminism?
The decline continues:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobaurist/2012/09/25/why-you-should-buy-your-little-boy-a-princess-costume/
Of course, even Forbes is an establishment mouthpiece.
For your amusement Captain:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.forbes.com/sites/davidkwilliams/2012/09/29/10-reasons-to-stay-at-a-job-for-10-or-more-years/2/
I don't think putting a man on the moon will be the utimate pinnacle of human achievement, but it is the pinnacle of western civilization.
ReplyDeleteIt will be centuries before another culture every rivals what the west was.
Yeah. I agree. It's kinda sad when you visit the Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville, AL and realize that Von Braun had plans to visit Mars using nuclear-powered rockets using 60s tech! Whoa!
ReplyDeleteSigh. Just think what coulda happened if we'd spent money on visiting the stars rather than wasting money on the utopian project of bringing democracy to the Vietnamese.
Posted this on facebook with some commentary that genius works alone and educational credentialing means little unless it has solid, real world application...
ReplyDeleteWhew! Some angry neckbeards and 20-something women. They are all chasing their master's....and it means everything to them.
South Texas,
ReplyDeleteI refuse to send any traffic to that article about the kid. Mercy, live has gotten so easy for journalists that they deem it article worthy at FORBES to talk about gender vs. sex in CHILDREN.
Forbes has definitely declined in the last 20 years. So has the Economist. Both of these magazines were quite good during the late 80's (come to think of it, lots of things were good in the 80's). Journalism has declined so bad in the last 20 years. I no longer read any print magazines at all now.
ReplyDeleteA fellow named John Zubrin who worked at NASA during the first Bush administration published an excellent book outlining how to send manned missions to Mars with technology possessed in 1969 - no nuclear rockets required, either. It was called The Case for Mars; I'd link to it but I don't know how to ensure Cap gets the affiliate kickback.
ReplyDeleteI think theres a big distinction that should be made here: the fact that we haven't gone back to the moon isn't evidence that human capability is declining, its evidence that government capability is declining. Going to the moon was always a demonstration of the capability of the US government. I doubt there are many people out there, if any, who would claim that the US government was as competent and capable of leading its people as it was 40 years ago, largely because the societal changes that have taken place exploit their power primarily through the government.
ReplyDeleteFor evidence of the health of human capability, just look at continued technological improvement by private enterprises. Private enterprise could never have made it to the moon in 1970 (wheres the profit?), but many other improvements to human lifestyle and human capabilities have come since then, and it looks increasingly likely that private enterprise will become the premier entity in space within the next 20 years.
I think my post got killed by the robot filter, but the whole "can't put a man on the moon" argument says nothing about HUMAN capability, but it says plenty about GOVERNMENT capability. I think few will argue that the government is run as well as it was 40 years ago.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I've never understood why outer space exploration is deemed the metric by which human progress is measured.
ReplyDeleteI can't help but think about people on the Moon, rovers on Mars, and not feel like we don't have more important things to be doing. Yes, it's cool, but does it really matter? Does knowing if there was ever life on Mars make my life any different, or even better?
Obviously these things are important in a pure research sense, but right now, it mostly feels like the realization of adolescent fantasy than useful science. More of a pissing contest than an actual accomplishment.
Its a only pissing contest if you believe we live in a closed system and colonizing space is impossible. If you believe in open systems, then space is the place.
ReplyDeleteYes, we could be on Mars if we hadn't gone boyscouting in Vietnam, paid through the nose to lawyers and ex-wives and transferred trillions of dollars incubating a non-white underclass in every single western nation on earth.
But its also possible that some among us are already on Mars and our closed system/flat earth worldview will soon end.
The proof of how past we are: when Bush decided we were to go to the Moon again did we take out the Saturn V, CM, SM, and LM systems out and start work on mod 2 designs using modern electronics, maybe adding solar in addition to (or in place of one of) the fuel cells on the SM and so on?
ReplyDeleteNo, we decided to design them all again with a super CM, super SM, super LM, and super Saturn V (sorry, Mars V).
Meanwhile, the Russians are still using the capsule system they developed for their failed moonshot. Of course, the modern Soyuz has a glass cockpit, re-usable re-entry module, and more usable volume for less weight (due to the three part instead of two part design). But such evolution is just too much for the new and improved US. Better to start something new and then give up.
We couldn't even bother to learn the 2 versus 3 part advantage which GE pitched to NASA in the early 60s. Not being sure of it when people are just inventing spacecraft in the mid-60s is one thing. After it has a 40 year track record and the third nation to put a man into space adopted it you ignore it because you're more interested is some personal vision than in achieving your goal.
We walked on the Moon when I was two. When I was a kid I wanted to be an astronaut more than anything. Now I'm 45 and we're hitching a ride from the people who couldn't even get to the Moon.
Oh, and the whole "math is hard and not worth it" attitude has nothing to do with us not doing things that make it worth learning anymore.