Skip to main content

Report on human body's problems in space should stimulate the search for solutions, not impede it

A new report says that human beings are not physically capable of living in space, bolstering the argument that exploration of other planets had best be done by robots.

But there's really nothing new in the report- and nothing that would lead to the conclusion that we cannot be made so. We've known about all the health hazards the report cites for some time, and it's clear as crystal that we not only should not but cannot, for example, send human beings to Mars before we can effectively protect them against the radiation they would encounter.

But the way to do that is to work on ways of doing so. The same is true of all of the other problems the report cites. And as I've argued repeatedly in this blog, that very effort- together with a crash program to send a manned mission to Mars ASAP (that is, as soon as the practical problems can we worked out) would, on the example of Projects Mercury, Gemini and Apollo, be one of the most economical and practical ways to get the economy moving again big time. Not only would it revive the economy instantly in several states heavily hit by the death of the American manned space program, but the growth it would stimulate in the economy- and the resultant increase in tax revenues- would likely follow the pattern established by the moon program: it would not only pay for itself in the long run, but manifest economic benefits exponentially greater than its initial cost!

But to get there, we have to try. And far from being an argument against the effort, the problems cited by the report- which again, are nothing new; we've known about them for some time- simply provide an additional and compelling reason to get crackin', as the pistachio folks say.

The sooner we start the research, the sooner the jobs return- and the sooner we get the economy back on track.

HT: Drudge


Popular posts from this blog

McMullin, Kasich, Hickenlooper, Huntsman, or somebody else sane in 2020!

I don't expect to be disenfranchised in 2020. I'm looking forward to Evan McMullin running against President Trump and whatever left-wing extremist the Democrats nominate. McMullin may or may not run for the Senate next year, and he may or may not run for president as an independent again next time around, but the nation can't afford to lose its most eloquent and intelligent critic of the populist takeover of the Republican party and the Executive Branch. We need the man in public life.

But interesting alternatives have developed. Ohio Gov. John Kasich has been mentioned as a potential primary challenger for Mr. Trump. I hope somebody continues the fight for the soul of my former party, even though I believe it to be a lost cause. Entrepreneur Mark Cuban is reportedly also considering a challenge to Mr. Trump. While I tend to see him at this point as somewhere to the left of where a candidate I would feel comfortable supporting might be, I would wish him well. Still, I see…

A modest proposal for a shocking innovation which is completely within the rules but which would, if adopted, revolutionize college football

I call it defense.

The idea- crazy as it may sound- is to supplement the scoring of points by your offense with an attempt to stop the other team from scoring them. Yeah, I know.  Really "out there," isn't it? But it has a history of winning not only games but championships. Modern college teams should try it more.

I'm a bit bummed about the Rose Bowl outcome but amused by the score. It seems that certain conferences aren't sure whether they're playing college football or high school basketball! I've noticed that in the scores of Sooner games. Last season the nation's college teams set a record by scoring an average of slightly more than 30 points each per game. That's a lot. Historically, that's a REAL lot.

The final score of the Rose Bowl was 54-48, though to be fair that was in double overtime. But to get there, the teams had to be tied 45-45 at the end of regulation! Last year was even worse. Southern Cal beat Penn State 52-49- in regulat…

A third party President in 2020?

I had the pleasure of meeting Joel Searsby, the campaign manager for Evan McMullin last year, at an event for Evan here in Des Moines during the campaign. Here's an interview with Joel by Jon Ward of Yahoo News on the ways in which centrist French President Emmanuel Marcon's out-of-nowhere landslide election last year may serve as an example for the inevitable bid to elect a rational, moderate third party candidate in 2020.

I have a feeling that it will be Evan McMullin again. But names like John Kasich, the Governor of Ohio, and Sen. Lindsey Graham also keep popping up. Word is that Kasich may challenge President Trump for the 2020 Republican nomination, an endeavor in which I'd wish him well but hold out very, very little hope for his success. I sadly expect that my conviction that the Republicans are dead as a vehicle for rationality and the reuniting of our fractured and divided country to be confirmed by the easy renomination of the most unfit and unqualified preside…