[Archived] Weirdy Beardys

[Stuart]

He'll be suspended, because he isn't Muslim.

Can someone confirm why a beard is "all of a sudden" a human rights issue (or even religious) requirement in order to be a British Muslim?

Just seems like the latest way to create division in the community.

[adopted scouser]

Wouldn't have seen it if they had worn a veil

Pathetic they have given in but not surprising, everyone's terrified of Islam and the continually offended.

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

Another small step on this country's descent from secular common sense towards religious mysticism.

Was watching a program on the moon landings the other day and wondered why the west never achieves anything spectacular anymore. We're letting ourselves be dragged backwards.

[jim mk2]

Oh I don't know - in the past 2 days there have been stories on the news on significant scientific breakthroughs in the treatment of cancer and dementia that will ultimately save millions of lives. Far more important I would say than man on the moon.

It's "programme" by the way.

[thenodrog]

Oh I don't know - in the past 2 days there have been stories on the news on significant scientific breakthroughs in the treatment of cancer and dementia that will ultimately save millions of lives. Far more important I would say than man on the moon.

It's "programme" by the way.

Correction... it won't save any lives it will merely prolongue them.

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

I know I tickled your xenophobic anti-America bug by mentioning one of their phenomenal achievements and using one of their words but personally I fail to see how 2 breakthroughs who's primary effect will be the further overpopulation of this planet, rank above the one scientific pursuit that will guarantee the long-term survival of our species.

We're polluting the planet, slowly whittling down its plants and animals, using up resources, and multiplying and multiplying which is starting to bring down our standard of living. I know the humanitarian accomplishment of medical advancement is amazing but I have to question what you expect the end game to be if you rank that as far more important than space exploration.

Are we just gonna infest this one ant hill for the next few thousand years until an asteroid comes along and destroys it, or until we destroy it ourselves?

[Stuart]

I know I tickled your xenophobic anti-America bug by mentioning one of their phenomenal achievements and using one of their words but personally I fail to see how 2 breakthroughs who's primary effect will be the further overpopulation of this planet, rank above the one scientific pursuit that will guarantee the long-term survival of our species.

We're polluting the planet, slowly whittling down its plants and animals, using up resources, and multiplying and multiplying which is starting to bring down our standard of living. I know the humanitarian accomplishment of medical advancement is amazing but I have to question what you expect the end game to be if you rank that as far more important than space exploration.

Are we just gonna infest this one ant hill for the next few thousand years until an asteroid comes along and destroys it, or until we destroy it ourselves?

If we can create life on the moon, a barren, uninhabitable orb with no atmosphere, then we should be able to do something about the earth.

If we believe our scientists though, the idea that we could travel to an inhabitable planet within the life span of the average human is impossible. So maybe prolonging life might be the first step to achieving that.

Barring a meteor strike, human life should exist on earth for a few years yet. Perhaps getting the average life expectancy up to 150 or 200 years might actually be a good start?

[Amo]

I know it's a social death to say the Moon Landings were fake, but by heck don't they look fake.

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

If we can create life on the moon, a barren, uninhabitable orb with no atmosphere, then we should be able to do something about the earth.

If we believe our scientists though, the idea that we could travel to an inhabitable planet within the life span of the average human is impossible. So maybe prolonging life might be the first step to achieving that.

Barring a meteor strike, human life should exist on earth for a few years yet. Perhaps getting the average life expectancy up to 150 or 200 years might actually be a good start?

Well its not really about creating life on the moon in my opinion. The moon is a first, tiny, insignificant step towards an incredibly difficult goal. Its like Columbus setting off to America and expecting to get something worthwhile out of the first square metre of sea that his boat encounters.

I agree, I mean a lightyear is mind-bogglingly far, and we'll probably be talking hundreds of them to reach something habitable. The only way we're going to make it possible within a human lifespan is if we can build ships that can fly very close to the speed of light (thus compressing time by a large factor). But what's to stop us being on ships for hundreds of years and having generations live and die on them?

Personally I'm struggling to see how increasing our life expectancy helps us as a species. At present its on the verge of crippling the country with an imminent pensions crisis. Unless we can be active and productive in mind and body at old age then its of little practical benefit to society. And even if we can, I can't see how overpopulation isn't going to be a huge problem in the next few hundred years.

[Stuart]

Well its not really about creating life on the moon in my opinion. The moon is a first, tiny, insignificant step towards an incredibly difficult goal. Its like Columbus setting off to America and expecting to get something worthwhile out of the first square metre of sea that his boat encounters.

I agree, I mean a lightyear is mind-bogglingly far, and we'll probably be talking hundreds of them to reach something habitable. The only way we're going to make it possible within a human lifespan is if we can build ships that can fly very close to the speed of light (thus compressing time by a large factor). But what's to stop us being on ships for hundreds of years and having generations live and die on them?

Personally I'm struggling to see how increasing our life expectancy helps us as a species. At present its on the verge of crippling the country with an imminent pensions crisis. Unless we can be active and productive in mind and body at old age then its of little practical benefit to society. And even if we can, I can't see how overpopulation isn't going to be a huge problem in the next few hundred years.

This thread is taking a very surreal turn but I like your style so I'll stay with it.

Fuel to power this space-ship that will accommodate people for a few generations? Solar power may be useless as we drift further and further away from the sun.

You'd need to be pretty brave/stupid to board that ship with nothing but hope and faith in science that you would eventually reach somewhere which could sustain life.

Might as well believe in God and life after death...

[jim mk2]

I know I tickled your xenophobic anti-America bug by mentioning one of their phenomenal achievements and using one of their words but personally I fail to see how 2 breakthroughs who's primary effect will be the further overpopulation of this planet, rank above the one scientific pursuit that will guarantee the long-term survival of our species.

We're polluting the planet, slowly whittling down its plants and animals, using up resources, and multiplying and multiplying which is starting to bring down our standard of living. I know the humanitarian accomplishment of medical advancement is amazing but I have to question what you expect the end game to be if you rank that as far more important than space exploration.

Are we just gonna infest this one ant hill for the next few thousand years until an asteroid comes along and destroys it, or until we destroy it ourselves?

So we should let the old and sick die because we have a pensions crisis ? Brilliant ! Let's have a few more wars too - that should keep the population down.

I would bet most people couldn't give two farts about man exploring space but they care passionately when they see loved ones taken away from them because of dementia or cancer. If you had a relative suffering from either of those you might know how it feels.

I'm not anti-American by the way - only Republicans and Tea party twits.

And it's "whose" not who's.

I know it's a social death to say the Moon Landings were fake, but by heck don't they look fake.

Of course they were fake.

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

Of course they were fake.

Excuse the language but f****** b******. That imbecilic point of view is most commonly held amongst people who are clever but have little interest, little respect for and absolutely no clue about science.

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

This thread is taking a very surreal turn but I like your style so I'll stay with it.

Fuel to power this space-ship that will accommodate people for a few generations? Solar power may be useless as we drift further and further away from the sun.

You'd need to be pretty brave/stupid to board that ship with nothing but hope and faith in science that you would eventually reach somewhere which could sustain life.

Might as well believe in God and life after death...

Haha well as you can probably tell the subject is a bit of a passion of mine.

I agree, the technological challenges are enormous. But there's ideas such as the Bussard Ramjet that aren't a million miles from being feasible. As for getting people who would go, believe me that wouldn't be a problem, there's quite a lot of people who love this kind of stuff.

I mean everything about the idea suggests it would be by far the hardest thing mankind has ever accomplished, and there's stuff like the Fermi Paradox which indicate it may be impossible. But personally I find the notion that exploration is over and we're doomed to endless stagnation on one planet when there's something like 1 trillion others in our galaxy alone depressing.

[Stuart]

I mean everything about the idea suggests it would be by far the hardest thing mankind has ever accomplished, and there's stuff like the Fermi Paradox which indicate it may be impossible. But personally I find the notion that exploration is over and we're doomed to endless stagnation on one planet when there's something like 1 trillion others in our galaxy alone depressing.

Here's the kicker though, mate.

Whatever happens we won't get there in our lifetime.

Like I said, if you want some hope of salvation and that there is something else to our being, other than simply waiting to expire, you may as well get religious.

Just don't use it as an excuse for to grow a keany beard!

[Amo]

Of course they were fake.

In the back of my mind, I've always had my doubts.

Like, why haven't they gone up there again? How did they take off FROM the moon back to Earth? And how did they make it through the radiation belt?

[Mike E]

People always underestimate the benefits of space exploration. Everything from lighter materials only a few atoms thick, lcd and plasma tvs and even the MRI machine are all offshoot ideas that came to being through space exploration.

[jim mk2]

Excuse the language but f****** b******. That imbecilic point of view is most commonly held amongst people who are clever but have little interest, little respect for and absolutely no clue about science.

The moon landings were a hoax - an elaborate hoax but a hoax nonetheless. I'm interested in science that is relevant and can help the suffering of human beings - and that means anything that relieves the pain of people who are suffering terrible illnesses. If you had someone close to you who had dementia you might understand and not make offensive statements such as the one above.

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

Here's the kicker though, mate.

Whatever happens we won't get there in our lifetime.

Like I said, if you want some hope of salvation and that there is something else to our being, other than simply waiting to expire, you may as well get religious.

Just don't use it as an excuse for to grow a keany beard!

To be honest though I really don't mind. I've always been of the opinion that it'll be later rather than sooner so I'm used to the idea of being long gone. A lot of sci-fi writers seem to envisage us going interstellar within hundreds of years, personally I'd be impressed if we do it in 5,000. But the idea that we'll get there eventually and that we're trying to get there would be more than enough for me. Bit like when people say they'd rather be on at the bottom of a ladder they want to climb than halfway up one they don't when it comes to their career.

At the moment we're not even trying, and a lot of people obviously don't think we should be, that's what I find depressing. That attitude absolutely and totally guarantees as a species we'll die on this planet. And with the various risks, nuclear war, global warming, asteroid strike, some kind of super virus etc, I'm not convinced we'll even have that long.

[Paul]

Given we are destroying the planet surely our research and money would be better spent on tackling climate change than building a rocket to travel at the speed of light? Then find a habitable planet and then build enough rockets to shift a sizeable representative section of the gene pool to a far off corner of the universe to start all over again.

Throw money at clean energy and tackle the vested interests campaigning against change and the earth can remain very habitable.

Next it would be good to feed people and reduce our selfish impact on the third world.

This just might be more realistic.

[Sparky Marky]

Given we are destroying the planet surely our research and money would be better spent on tackling climate change than building a rocket to travel at the speed of light? Then find a habitable planet and then build enough rockets to shift a sizeable representative section of the gene pool to a far off corner of the universe to start all over again.

Throw money at clean energy and tackle the vested interests campaigning against change and the earth can remain very habitable.

Next it would be good to feed people and reduce our selfish impact on the third world.

This just might be more realistic.

Do you not think its just a big red herring all this climate change carry on..? It's the climate, it warms up, it cools down over time....we just live in this point in time, like a pin prick on the whole story...what a waste of my money...we all pay the government a climate change tax in our energy bills...joke.

[Tom]

If the moon grew a beard would he be allowed in the Milky Way?

[Steve Moss]

We should terra-form the Moon, Venus, Mars, Europa, etc. Spreading the human race throughout the solar system is perfectly feasible over the next 100-500 years.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

In the back of my mind, I've always had my doubts.Like, why haven't they gone up there again? How did they take off FROM the moon back to Earth? And how did they make it through the radiation belt?

You need to remember this was all done at the height of the very competitive Cold War Space Race. How come the Russians, who surely would have known wether it was a fake mission or not, didn't expose it as such. I've no real opinion either way but that question springs to mind.

[T.J.Newton]

We should terra-form the Moon, Venus, Mars, Europa, etc. Spreading the human race throughout the solar system is perfectly feasible over the next 100-500 years.

im assuming that your kiddin!

[thenodrog]

Haha well as you can probably tell the subject is a bit of a passion of mine.

I agree, the technological challenges are enormous. But there's ideas such as the Bussard Ramjet that aren't a million miles from being feasible. As for getting people who would go, believe me that wouldn't be a problem, there's quite a lot of people who love this kind of stuff.

Office telephone cleaners? 15.00 t0 21 mins

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBmdkhDGZ8A

The moon landings were a hoax - an elaborate hoax but a hoax nonetheless. I'm interested in science that is relevant and can help the suffering of human beings - and that means anything that relieves the pain of people who are suffering terrible illnesses. If you had someone close to you who had dementia you might understand and not make offensive statements such as the one above.

In that case can I take it that you a keen supporter of euthanasia?