Should humanity focus on deep sea exploration or space exploration...

Qianglong

Senior member
Jan 29, 2006
937
0
0
With limited budget and scientific know-how, should humanity focus more on the exploration of deep sea or space? Which one will yield greater benefit for mankind?
 

FoBoT

No Lifer
Apr 30, 2001
63,084
14
81
fobot.com
how much budget does 'humanity' have? does 'humanity' even have a checking account?
i think individuals should use their private resources in any lawful way they choose
some may see potential value in 'sea exploration' , others in 'space exploration'

based on history, both seem useful to some degree
 

ichy

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2006
6,940
8
81
It's not an either/or proposition. NASA consumes something like half of one percent of the federal budget.

Also, advancements in robotics and automation will be hugely valuable for both deep sea and space exploration.
 

artvscommerce

Golden Member
Jul 27, 2010
1,143
17
81
I think one of the biggest advantages to space exploration is that it gets the public excited about science; something that isn't easy to do. The more we can popularize science the more people we will have that will want to study it. Well worth the cost in my opinion.
 

TecHNooB

Diamond Member
Sep 10, 2005
7,458
1
76
the real question is, how will amerika, greatest country in world, benefit from either?
 

AFurryReptile

Golden Member
Nov 5, 2006
1,998
1
76
I feel you're getting ahead of our capabilities by thousands of years, if not tens of thousands.

Maybe, but the only way humans are going to survive in the long run is to expand our borders. Sure, our sun isn't going to burn out immediately, but there are other ways for the world to end. We might kill ourselves, for example.

That said, there's plenty of benefit to exploring space for its own merit. I wholeheartedly believe that there is life out there, somewhere.

 

gothamhunter

Diamond Member
Apr 20, 2010
4,464
6
81
At this point, deep sea would be more interesting than continually seeing nothing in space. I would love to see some creatures from long ago down in the bottom of the oceans.
 
Feb 6, 2007
16,432
1
81
At this point, deep sea would be more interesting than continually seeing nothing in space. I would love to see some creatures from long ago down in the bottom of the oceans.
We'll end up waking Cthulhu or the Kraken or Megashark, and then where would we be? Screwed, that's where.
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Mar 5, 2001
49,601
166
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
At this point, deep sea would be more interesting than continually seeing nothing in space. I would love to see some creatures from long ago down in the bottom of the oceans.
I think it would be 1000's of times more interesting - perhaps the greatest discovery in history - to see some creatures in the oceans of Europa or one of the other moons in the solar system.
 

destrekor

Lifer
Nov 18, 2005
28,799
359
126
Space.

The world will end some day, and we need to be off this planet when that happens.

I feel you're getting ahead of our capabilities by thousands of years, if not tens of thousands.

That may be the case, but it is something we absolutely must consider WAY before the time it is needed. We have a history, as a species, of waiting until the problem rears it's ugly head before we do anything about it. We won't last more than one or two apocalyptic events if we remain that headstrong and that oblivious to the needs of the future.
I cannot fathom the number of people who quip "if it won't happen in my lifetime, why the fuck should I care?"... which makes me wonder just how much longer we can actually last - as an advanced species - if we don't even think about the upcoming generations, let alone hundreds of years (or more) into the future.
We can't simply have the wait and see attitude, and we surely cannot continue to push off future issues and leave them for future generations to consider (and feel). Hell, our governments typically fail to earnestly plan a few decades out, nor construct anything (of a political nature - services, programs, policies, departments, budgets) that stands up firmly for more than a few decades... even when there is ample knowledge that more must be considered to stave off problems that future generations will absolutely have to patch up.
It's why I honestly don't have much hope for us. Yeah it's great to think about us as a space-faring species with advanced technologies, but I honestly don't see much good coming out of all that for us, because, at best, it'll be like a large slum here on the ground and such vehicles will probably be grounded (if ever constructed).

That's one reason I am actually quite ecstatic the government gave space exploration to private corporations instead of keeping it as a government-controlled entity. We fail to dedicate the budget necessary, and fail to see what can and should be done NOW, to ensure something can come of it when it is practical. Private entities competing with each other, and competing for our moneys, will result in a faster pace for technology progress. Which is absolutely needed for increasing our knowledge for advanced physics, which is fundamental to further our technology and sciences so that we can begin envisioning just how to accomplish our space-faring goals beyond our solar system. Short of massive and unimaginably expensive projects like generation ships (far too early to even fathom at this point, our propulsion technology is not ready for even that just yet), we need far more scientific knowledge. We can't do that without planning and attempting whatever we can do NOW, because, short of stumbling upon chance discoveries (most beneficial advances have actually been born of such), we can't expect the evolution of physics and technology to occur anytime soon ... and it certainly can't happen without dedicating time and resources to the cause.


there is oil in the sea

is there oil in space? :confused:

We can strip mine those gas giants (and their rocky moons) for all the hydrocarbons we could ever desire. :D
Might not be the same stuff as oil, but considering there are far more hydrocarbons in space than we could imagine using in the next few thousand years (and I'm just looking at our immediate solar neighborhood), it wouldn't be a bad idea to switch to those for energy consumption, if we absolutely must.
 

destrekor

Lifer
Nov 18, 2005
28,799
359
126
I think it would be 1000's of times more interesting - perhaps the greatest discovery in history - to see some creatures in the oceans of Europa or one of the other moons in the solar system.

And let's not forget the little fact that a lot of pre-trials for space exploration are born out of advances out of the deep. Testing of new materials, new clues as to what to look for in terms of life, and experimentation with new vehicles and crew training at the deepest depths of the ocean, will probably lead to new/better approaches, and new ideas, as to how best to tackle extra-terrestrial "oceanography".

We may need to find ourselves drilling on far-away moons, or mining under tremendous atmospheric pressures (or liquid-based pressures), just to get to needed resources (be they new or even old, just depleted/low on Earth).
 

SirStev0

Lifer
Nov 13, 2003
10,449
6
81
We are way too concerned with keeping homo's from marrying and women from having any choice in their life to have any time for things like progress.

The only reason we even bothered with space in the first place was because the Russian's dared to fuck with our brilliant military industrial complex scheme and forced us to waste time on that.