Archive: 30 posts

---

It has always been my dream to have that generic science fiction universe we're all familiar with as a reality. Travelling at light speed in a star ship to other planets where there are thriving colonies all over the habitable open surface, with ships going all over to mine different places in space. In real life, I am constantly imagining myself in a universe like this. I look up at the moon and pretend it has rings, and I imagine planes to look differently and be travelling much faster because of technological advancement. I look up at the contrails left by planes and pretend that its the steam from a ship; when exiting the atmosphere, water is sprayed onto the hull to cool it down, and the resulting steam is what I see. I spend tons of time outside at night, looking at the starts and just imagining new history and stories that all take place in this universe Ive created. However, despite this being my dream and the universe I wish I could live in, and always trying my hardest to take everyday things and make them seem like Im there, Ive always known it was impossible. Theres no reason to go into space, light speed travel on a ship is very far away, if possible at all, and there are certainly no habitable planets within reach. But what if a toned down version is? In the asteroid field between mars and jupiter, there are estimations of over a million asteroids. In many of these asteroids are all types of metals and other materials useful for people on earth, and with so many asteroids an incredible amount of material could be harvested from them. So is it a possibility for the near future to have starships capable of making long journeys(not at light speed of course!) into the asteroid belt to collect useful materials? And what about space habitats; giant rings that spin around to simulate gravity, taking in energy from the completely-direct sunlight, and inside the ring are living conditions perfect for many humans to live. You watch star trek and you say, "that's impossible". But when you think about the things Ive mentioned, really think about them, arent they very possible? Its doubtful we'll ever have light speed ships or wars with alien races using ray guns, but aren't some things like this actually plausible in the near future? Do you believe they are? Or if youre someone older who really knows what youre talking about, you could provide me with a little more insight; but I dont see whats stopping these things from happening, unlike colonized planets or light speed, which despite being all over science fiction seem pretty impossible.

2012-04-07 01:36:00 Author: ATMLVE Posts: 1177

---

As a collective race we are constantly and simultaneously setting and breaking our own limits. The term "impossible" is so strong, yet so weak. It only takes one counter example to spark a fire.

2012-04-07 01:53:00 Author: Littlebigdude805 Posts: 1924

---

I'm not really willing to dive into that brick and try to decide what you mean, but I will say this: Science fiction is not possible. That goes against the very concept of fiction. Thank you, and good night. /goes back under bridge

2012-04-07 02:20:00 Author: RockSauron Posts: 10882

---

I'm not really willing to dive into that brick and try to decide what you mean, but I will say this: Science fiction is not possible. That goes against the very concept of fiction. Thank you, and good night. /goes back under bridge I see this the same way as I see "tomorrow never comes". Fiction is what doesn't exist at the moment. Back in 1800-2000, submarines and space travel were only science fiction. I think you can see where I'm going to.

2012-04-07 02:36:00 Author: gdn001 Posts: 5891

---

I see this the same way as I see "tomorrow never comes". Fiction is what doesn't exist at the moment. Back in 1800-2000, submarines and space travel were only science fiction. I think you can see where I'm going to. Exactly. Science fiction changes as time goes on. Right now, science fiction is colonies in space and spaceships flying around and mining asteroids. And I see no drawbacks that would suggest that thats impossible.

2012-04-07 03:47:00 Author: ATMLVE Posts: 1177

---

It has always been my dream to have that generic science fiction universe we're all familiar with as a reality. Travelling at light speed in a star ship to other planets where there are thriving colonies all over the habitable open surface, with ships going all over to mine different places in space. In real life, I am constantly imagining myself in a universe like this. I look up at the moon and pretend it has rings, and I imagine planes to look differently and be travelling much faster because of technological advancement. I look up at the contrails left by planes and pretend that its the steam from a ship; when exiting the atmosphere, water is sprayed onto the hull to cool it down, and the resulting steam is what I see. I spend tons of time outside at night, looking at the starts and just imagining new history and stories that all take place in this universe Ive created. However, despite this being my dream and the universe I wish I could live in, and always trying my hardest to take everyday things and make them seem like Im there, Ive always known it was impossible. Theres no reason to go into space, light speed travel on a ship is very far away, if possible at all, and there are certainly no habitable planets within reach. But what if a toned down version is? In the asteroid field between mars and jupiter, there are estimations of over a million asteroids. In many of these asteroids are all types of metals and other materials useful for people on earth, and with so many asteroids an incredible amount of material could be harvested from them. So is it a possibility for the near future to have starships capable of making long journeys(not at light speed of course!) into the asteroid belt to collect useful materials? And what about space habitats; giant rings that spin around to simulate gravity, taking in energy from the completely-direct sunlight, and inside the ring are living conditions perfect for many humans to live. You watch star trek and you say, "that's impossible". But when you think about the things Ive mentioned, really think about them, arent they very possible? Its doubtful we'll ever have light speed ships or wars with alien races using ray guns, but aren't some things like this actually plausible in the near future? Do you believe they are? Or if youre someone older who really knows what youre talking about, you could provide me with a little more insight; but I dont see whats stopping these things from happening, unlike colonized planets or light speed, which despite being all over science fiction seem pretty impossible. I take it that paragraphs are also a fiction to you.

2012-04-07 04:02:00 Author: CyberSora Posts: 5551

---

I take it that paragraphs are also a fiction to you. Clearly evidenced by the two paragraphs, each having its own topic that is maintained throughout.

2012-04-07 04:48:00 Author: ATMLVE Posts: 1177

---

Well, we are working on going to mars at the moment. It's one small step towards space colonization. I feel like we have the technology, just not the knowledge.

2012-04-07 06:03:00 Author: ConverseFox Posts: 2333

---

Well, we are working on going to mars at the moment. It's one small step towards space colonization. I feel like we have the technology, just not the knowledge. The thing is, whats the benefit of that? No one could live there, except in enclosed areas, so youd need a really big enclosed area to house even a relatively small number of people. And are there valuable materials to be mined there? If there are, then I guess theres a point. But if theres not, there isnt a point to going there. Plus, mars temperature goes totally out of wack; the days are scorching hot and the nights are freezing cold, due to the fact that it lets tons of heat in and doesnt have a way to keep it there. So youd need a very powerful temperature control system, whereas something in space orbiting earth would have relatively the same temperature hitting it 24/7.

2012-04-07 06:33:00 Author: ATMLVE Posts: 1177

---

Theoretically to colonize Mars, scientists need to introduce carbon dioxide and plant life into its atmosphere... an expensive process known as 'terraforming'. This would produce oxygen as a plant byproduct, and begin to stabilize the air. ...But since it's all too expensive and people are to stubborn to agree on anything or work together entirely, this process will never occur. As long as people would rather spend their hard earned money to contribute to the destruction of our own planet and it's inhabitants, then were all doomed... and Christmas never comes for poor Johnny THE END! (sorry ) p.s. love your levels by the way

2012-04-07 12:39:00 Author: Unknown User

---

Clearly evidenced by the two paragraphs, each having its own topic that is maintained throughout. Two very long paragraphs, with no spacing in between. I'm not even going to bother putting the effort in to read it when you clearly didn't put the effort in to make it readable.

2012-04-07 14:00:00 Author: RockSauron Posts: 10882

---

Theoretically to colonize Mars, scientists need to introduce carbon dioxide and plant life into its atmosphere... an expensive process known as 'terraforming'. This would produce oxygen as a plant byproduct, and begin to stabilize the air. ...But since it's all too expensive and people are to stubborn to agree on anything or work together entirely, this process will never occur. As long as people would rather spend their hard earned money to contribute to the destruction of our own planet and it's inhabitants, then were all doomed... and Christmas never comes for poor Johnny THE END! (sorry ) I dont think its a matter of money; actually, it probably is. If we had complete access to mars, Im sure we could find a way to terraform it eventually, despite its very harsh climate. The soil on mars is not very suitable for plant life, and combined with freezing temperatures, theyd need a lot of help. Plus, in order for the plants to be watered, there would either have to be an artificial system or wed have to make one like the complex cycle found on earth, from scratch, and that would be extremely difficult. Therefore to at least start out, an artificial watering system would be the only option. And since the plants would only be able to grow in certain areas where the watering system is, then you would need to spend a ton of money and time to make enough plant... things to convert almost all the carbon dioxide to oxygen. Plus, youre not really doing that much terraforming because the plants arent naturally growing all over the planet, youre just changing the air. p.s. love your levels by the way Lol thanks. Two very long paragraphs, with no spacing in between. I'm not even going to bother putting the effort in to read it when you clearly didn't put the effort in to make it readable. I wrote some of it out, then deleted half of it because it was too long and not getting to the point. Then when I finished writing my first paragraph, where the subject didnt change and there wasnt really a place to make a new paragraph and I didnt think any little rudes would care anyway, I started the next one, where the subject is pretty much the same throughout it as well, though I suppose I could have split it up a little more. On a post of that scale, typos would obviously be abundant, so I re-read the entire post and corrected any grammar and spelling mistakes and even made a few changes. I also indented both paragraphs five spaces, but alas, they dont show up. So I made just one space, but for some reason that didnt show up either. Now if you hadnt been an asterisks and actually read the post, you might have found that the grammar and spelling of the post was pretty good, as well as not repeating words together too early. I have no clue at all why you posted here if you didnt read the OP, considering the thread is supposed to be a discussion about it. TL;DR BECAUSETHEREWASNTENOUGHPARAGRAPHSFORYOURSOREBUTT: I spent lots of time correcting that post, and if youd actually read it you might have seen that. I think its sad and pathetic that you look at a post and say I didnt put any time or effort into it because theres not enough paragraphs. Leave my thread.

2012-04-07 14:52:00 Author: ATMLVE Posts: 1177

---

I wrote some of it out, then deleted half of it because it was too long and not getting to the point. Then when I finished writing my first paragraph, where the subject didnt change and there wasnt really a place to make a new paragraph and I didnt think any little rudes would care anyway, I started the next one, where the subject is pretty much the same throughout it as well, though I suppose I could have split it up a little more. On a post of that scale, typos would obviously be abundant, so I re-read the entire post and corrected any grammar and spelling mistakes and even made a few changes. I also indented both paragraphs five spaces, but alas, they dont show up. So I made just one space, but for some reason that didnt show up either. Now if you hadnt been an asterisks and actually read the post, you might have found that the grammar and spelling of the post was pretty good, as well as not repeating words together too early. I have no clue at all why you posted here if you didnt read the OP, considering the thread is supposed to be a discussion about it. TL;DR BECAUSETHEREWASNTENOUGHPARAGRAPHSFORYOURSOREBUTT: I spent lots of time correcting that post, and if youd actually read it you might have seen that. I think its sad and pathetic that you look at a post and say I didnt put any time or effort into it because theres not enough paragraphs. Leave my thread. I applaud your effort in making your post more grammar friendly; however, you're missing the whole point in both our comments. Your post (or all your posts for that matter) are terribly compact, thus making it hard on the eyes for many users. Of course, some of us would just look past this and read anyways, but the rest of us find it irritating. Maybe this will help in getting the point across: It has always been my dream to have that generic science fiction universe we're all familiar with as a reality. Travelling at light speed in a star ship to other planets where there are thriving colonies all over the habitable open surface, with ships going all over to mine different places in space. In real life, I am constantly imagining myself in a universe like this. I look up at the moon and pretend it has rings, and I imagine planes to look differently and be travelling much faster because of technological advancement. I look up at the contrails left by planes and pretend that its the steam from a ship; when exiting the atmosphere, water is sprayed onto the hull to cool it down, and the resulting steam is what I see. I spend tons of time outside at night, looking at the starts and just imagining new history and stories that all take place in this universe Ive created. However, despite this being my dream and the universe I wish I could live in, and always trying my hardest to take everyday things and make them seem like Im there, Ive always known it was impossible. Theres no reason to go into space, light speed travel on a ship is very far away, if possible at all, and there are certainly no habitable planets within reach. But what if a toned down version is? In the asteroid field between mars and jupiter, there are estimations of over a million asteroids. In many of these asteroids are all types of metals and other materials useful for people on earth, and with so many asteroids an incredible amount of material could be harvested from them. So is it a possibility for the near future to have starships capable of making long journeys(not at light speed of course!) into the asteroid belt to collect useful materials? And what about space habitats; giant rings that spin around to simulate gravity, taking in energy from the completely-direct sunlight, and inside the ring are living conditions perfect for many humans to live. You watch star trek and you say, "that's impossible". But when you think about the things Ive mentioned, really think about them, arent they very possible? Its doubtful we'll ever have light speed ships or wars with alien races using ray guns, but aren't some things like this actually plausible in the near future? Do you believe they are? Or if youre someone older who really knows what youre talking about, you could provide me with a little more insight; but I dont see whats stopping these things from happening, unlike colonized planets or light speed, which despite being all over science fiction seem pretty impossible. It has always been my dream to have that generic science fiction universe we're all familiar with as a reality. Travelling at light speed in a star ship to other planets where there are thriving colonies all over the habitable open surface, with ships going all over to mine different places in space. In real life, I am constantly imagining myself in a universe like this. I look up at the moon and pretend it has rings, and I imagine planes to looking differently and be travelling much faster because of technological advancements. I look up at the contrails left by planes and pretend that its the steam from a ship; when exiting the atmosphere, water is sprayed onto the hull to cool it down, and the resulting steam is what I see. I spend tons of time outside at night, looking at the starts and just imagining a new history and stories that all take place in this universe I have created. However, despite this being my dream and the universe I wish I could live in, and always trying my hardest to take everyday things and make them seem like I'm there, I have always known it was impossible. There is no reason to go into space, light speed travel on a ship is very far away, if possible at all, and there are certainly no habitable planets within reach. (citation needed) ? But what if a toned down version is? ? In the asteroid field between Mars and jupiter, there are estimations of over a million asteroids. In many of these asteroids are all types of metals and other materials useful for people on Earth, and with so many asteroids available an incredible amount of material could be harvested from them. So is it a possibility for the near future to have starships capable of making long journeys(not at light speed of course!) into the asteroid belt to collect useful materials? And what about space habitats; giant rings that spin around to simulate gravity, taking in energy from the completely-direct sunlight, and inside the ring are living conditions perfect for many humans to live? You watch Star Trek and you say, "That's impossible". But when you think about the things I have mentioned, really think about them, aren't they very possible? It is doubtful we'll ever have light-speed ships or wars with alien races using ray guns, but aren't some things like this actually plausible in the near future? Do you believe they are,? O or if you are someone older who really knows what you are talking about, you could you provide me with a little more insight? but I dont see what is stopping these things from happening, unlike colonized planets or light speed, which despite being all over science fiction seem pretty impossible. Notice how the edited version is more appealing to the reader. By spacing your paragraphs you help us, the readers, view your posts more clearly and relaxed. A clean and well thought out post makes for a much better read than a compact and disorganized one. Also, you may have noticed some of my revisions; I merely did this because you were banking on the claim that you revised and edited your post for a lengthy time, and " if youd actually read it you might have seen that." Well, I did re-read your post, and what I did find was both spelling mistakes and a lack of better wording. If you honestly believe that your post is flawless and lacks any sign of imperfection, then by all means go ahead and believe that; but to get mad about, insult us, and then tell us to leave in a rude manner is no way to control your thread. If you wanted to fight fire with fire, then I'm afraid you're bringing a match to a wildfire. Don't worry, though, because I'll be taking my leave now. Have fun with your thread.

2012-04-07 19:51:00 Author: CyberSora Posts: 5551

---

For all your hard sci-fi needs: http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/ In the asteroid field between mars and jupiter, there are estimations of over a million asteroids. In many of these asteroids are all types of metals and other materials useful for people on earth, and with so many asteroids an incredible amount of material could be harvested from them. So is it a possibility for the near future to have starships capable of making long journeys(not at light speed of course!) into the asteroid belt to collect useful materials? You don't need to go to the asteroid belt to mine it. You could bring the asteroids back here to sub-lunar orbit, mine them and dump the refuse into the Earth's atmosphere.

2012-04-07 20:11:00 Author: Ayneh Posts: 2454

---

For all your hard sci-fi needs: http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/ You don't need to go to the asteroid belt to mine it. You could bring the asteroids back here to sub-lunar orbit, mine them and dump the refuse into the Earth's atmosphere. Well I guess I wasnt exactly clear, but what I had in mind was the ships would break up the asteroids and bring them somewhere to be actually mined. A ship would therefore be mostly cargo space. I applaud your effort in making your post more grammar friendly; however, you're missing the whole point in both our comments. Your post (or all your posts for that matter) are terribly compact, thus making it hard on the eyes for many users. Of course, some of us would just look past this and read anyways, but the rest of us find it irritating. Maybe this will help in getting the point across: *spoilers dont show up in quotes* Notice how the edited version is more appealing to the reader. By spacing your paragraphs you help us, the readers, view your posts more clearly and relaxed. A clean and well thought out post makes for a much better read than a compact and disorganized one. Also, you may have noticed some of my revisions; I merely did this because you were banking on the claim that you revised and edited your post for a lengthy time, and " if youd actually read it you might have seen that." Well, I did re-read your post, and what I did find was both spelling mistakes and a lack of better wording. If you honestly believe that your post is flawless and lacks any sign of imperfection, then by all means go ahead and believe that; but to get mad about, insult us, and then tell us to leave in a rude manner is no way to control your thread. If you wanted to fight fire with fire, then I'm afraid you're bringing a match to a wildfire. Don't worry, though, because I'll be taking my leave now. Have fun with your thread. Due to my bad habit of not being able to let arguments go, I have to keep going. I want to stop, and I dont want a mod to have to intervene, but just something in my brain... Anyway, Im pretty sure english is your first language, considering youre in the US. However, some of the corrections you made just made things worse, and some made things better, and one would be correct, only you didnt understand what I was trying to say. I do however appreciate the time you put into trying to help. Also before I start, you said I think its perfect, but I know its not, which is why I said this in my post: that the grammar and spelling of the post was pretty good PRETTY good. I never said it was perfect like you said I did, because I know it isnt. Also, apostrophes are overrated, glad to see you didnt point those out, though you did correct most of them to make them longer and more awkward. Anyway, Im going to quote changes you made now: Original: I look up at the moon and pretend it has rings, and I imagine planes to look differently and be travelling much faster because of technological advancement. Your version: I look up at the moon and pretend it has rings, and I imagine planes looking differently and be travel much faster because of technological advancements. Although mine does sound awkward, yours has an extra "be" in there. Even if the "b" wasnt there, it still wouldnt sound right. Original: looking at the starts and just imagining a new history and stories that all take place in this universe Ive created. Your version: looking at the stars and just imagining new history and stories that all take place in this universe I have created. Heres what I meant. The universe Ive created(not I have, it sounds too long, and is an unnecessary change) takes place where there is no Earth at all. Nothing in space that we know of exists in the universe I made. So when I say "a new history", I literally mean "a new history". Entire history, from the beginning of time, in this universe. So I am creating a new history. And yeah, I said "starts" instead of "stars". My bad. Then you correct another "Ive" to "I have", again unnecessary. But then you ask for a citation when I say there arent any habitable planets within reach. For real man? We havent even found any yet. Now you go on and capitalize the letters that should be capitalized, which is good(you missed Jupiter, but I get the point). You also added an "available", which is neither necessary nor unnecessary. Maybe it makes things better, but I dont think theyre all available to us. Original: Do you believe they are? Or if youre someone older who really knows what youre talking about, you could provide me with a little more insight; but I dont see whats stopping these things from happening Your version: Do you believe they are, or if you are someone older who really knows what you are talking about, could you provide me with a little more insight? I dont see what is stopping these things from happening Again you take my abbreviations(missing apostrophes, I again acknowledge I dont use those) and make them sound longer and more awkward. Also, the first sentence from my version, which you changed in your version, is supposed to be its own sentence, and sounds better when its by itself. Later on, you change some things around, but I dont really see how those changes make it better or worse.

2012-04-07 21:09:00 Author: ATMLVE Posts: 1177

---

*whole bunch of grammar-related posts* *takes notes*

2012-04-07 21:36:00 Author: gdn001 Posts: 5891

---

Grammar lessons. Just came back to say that the overuse of the non-abbreviations were intended. Since you didn't use any apostrophes, I thought I'd correct them to show why apostrophes are needed to separate words. Of course, that contradicts my initial intent of actually correcting your post in the first place. /jumps out of thread again

2012-04-07 23:31:00 Author: CyberSora Posts: 5551

---

Well I guess I wasnt exactly clear, but what I had in mind was the ships would break up the asteroids and bring them somewhere to be actually mined. A ship would therefore be mostly cargo space. I'm guessing the way it'd be done realistically is it being tugged by a tether until it's on a trajectory with Earth, or maybe explosives would be used to knock it out of orbit and towards us, all done by unmanned craft. Not as glamorous as a manned ship with a cargo bay, though.

2012-04-08 17:46:00 Author: Ayneh Posts: 2454

---

I'm guessing the way it'd be done realistically is it being tugged by a tether until it's on a trajectory with Earth, or maybe explosives would be used to knock it out of orbit and towards us, all done by unmanned craft. Not as glamorous as a manned ship with a cargo bay, though. That makes much more sense. I never really thought of that, sending it to Earth instead of bringing it. That way, an unmanned "ship" could just keep sending them over. However, the thing about that is then if theres a problem, theres no one to fix it. Of course, you can always have a repair bot or something waiting outside the belt out of all harms way just in case. I think this way would be a lot less costly and less difficult than ships with people on them, as much as Id love the latter...

2012-04-08 18:59:00 Author: ATMLVE Posts: 1177

---

Why bother sending anything to the belt, there's plenty of stuff that passes Earth already.

2012-04-08 19:24:00 Author: Rabid-Coot Posts: 6728

---

Why bother sending anything to the belt, there's plenty of stuff that passes Earth already. True, but then you gotta have ships flying all over the place and grabbing them and sending them closer to Earth. It would take a lot of fuel and a lot of trips back to Earth to refuel, as opposed to a ship that has to only make one journey out to the belt and can basically stay in the same area as the belt orbits and new asteroids come floating along. And besides, theres still a lot more asteroids in the belt all the time, whereas the ones floating by Earth are random on not nearly as abundant.

2012-04-08 19:39:00 Author: ATMLVE Posts: 1177

---

You'd still have the same problem of sending ships up to intercept anything pushed towards us to stop it floating passed/burning up/impacting. Also pushing anything towards us would require exact precision the smallest initial error would be huge when it has traveled the distance between the belt and us. Going back to the original idea for manned mining expeditions would the resources gained by mining asteroids be sufficient to justify the resources required to do the mining.

2012-04-08 21:23:00 Author: Rabid-Coot Posts: 6728

---

Going back to the original idea for manned mining expeditions would the resources gained by mining asteroids be sufficient to justify the resources required to do the mining. That depends on how you look at it. Yes it would be expensive and require vast resources to fly a ship so far for so long, but the resources gained from the asteroids would be different than the resources used to get there. So in the future at the time this is all going on(assuming that it actually does), the resources needed to make the trip and mine the minerals may be more abundant or less expensive than the ones actually being harvested. Of course, manned ships making multiple trips goes against my last argument of ships using too much fuel to fly all over the place collecting random asteroids.

2012-04-09 00:57:00 Author: ATMLVE Posts: 1177

---

All I wanted was some line spacing in between paragraphs. Just because I don't want to force myself to read a giant block of text and try to tell you to fix it doesn't mean that you can just go blast off and say I'm some "rude" or whatever the **** you think I am. Try making something readable, i.e. not just two bricks smashed together, and try to make it easier for people tor ead, and then bingo, people don't have to work to read your posts. Or you can just pretend that you have no problem becasue you know the difference between "They're" and "their". But don't just expect people to be willing to have to work throug something you could easily have took the time to make easier for them.

2012-04-09 01:10:00 Author: RockSauron Posts: 10882

---

All I wanted was some line spacing in between paragraphs. Just because I don't want to force myself to read a giant block of text and try to tell you to fix it doesn't mean that you can just go blast off and say I'm some "rude" or whatever the **** you think I am. Try making something readable, i.e. not just two bricks smashed together, and try to make it easier for people tor ead, and then bingo, people don't have to work to read your posts. Or you can just pretend that you have no problem becasue you know the difference between "They're" and "their". But don't just expect people to be willing to have to work throug something you could easily have took the time to make easier for them. From what I have learned, 4-8 lines per paragraph should be ideal. Anyway, major topic sacrifice in favor of writing lessons. :/

2012-04-09 01:12:00 Author: gdn001 Posts: 5891

---

All I wanted was some line spacing in between paragraphs. Just because I don't want to force myself to read a giant block of text and try to tell you to fix it doesn't mean that you can just go blast off and say I'm some "rude" or whatever the **** you think I am. Try making something readable, i.e. not just two bricks smashed together, and try to make it easier for people tor ead, and then bingo, people don't have to work to read your posts. Or you can just pretend that you have no problem becasue you know the difference between "They're" and "their". But don't just expect people to be willing to have to work throug something you could easily have took the time to make easier for them. If you dont want me to call you rude, then dont come into a thread I made and tell me I "clearly didnt put the effort into making it readable," without even reading it. Instead, tell me that my paragraphs are too long and they need to be shortened. You didnt even say that, you didnt give any advice or solutions at all, you just told me what they were and how crappy they are. And now youre saying not to call you rude :/ Anyway, major topic sacrifice in favor of writing lessons. :/ Tell me about it. Its made worse by the fact that I simply cannot give up an argument.

2012-04-09 01:39:00 Author: ATMLVE Posts: 1177

---

News today on the asteroid mining front... Staffed by a former NASA astronaut and backed financially by Google's billionaire co-founders and filmmaker James Cameron, Planetary Resources has caused a stir since it issued a cryptic statement this week boldly claiming it could "ensure humanity's prosperity". The company, which was founded earlier this year and has just 20 employees, said it would combine space exploration with mining to develop a method to extract gold, platinum and other precious metals and minerals from asteroids in orbit around the Earth. It suggested that this could "add trillions of dollars to the global GDP". Washington-based Planetary Resources held a press conference at The Museum of Flight in Seattle on Tuesday afternoon, where it unveiled the first step of its long-term plan: a low-cost robotic spacecraft designed for surveying missions. Co-founders Peter Diamandis and Eric Anderson hope to launch their first probe within two years and believe that national agencies such as NASA will be among the first commercial customers. Within 10 years the business intends to diversify into space mining. Mr Diamandis estimates that an asteroid 98 feet long can contain as much as ?31bn in platinum. It could also yield water for consumption by astronauts, or for producing hydrogen fuel for use in future space exploration missions. No details on the size of the financial backing have been revealed, but Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, film director and deep-sea explorer James Cameron and former Microsoft chief software architect Charles Simonyi - a two-time space tourist - have been listed as investors. The company has also recruited a host of talent including NASA Mars mission manager Chris Lewicki and veteran NASA astronaut Tom Jones.

2012-04-24 21:11:00 Author: Ayneh Posts: 2454

---

News today on the asteroid mining front... Staffed by a former NASA astronaut and backed financially by Google's billionaire co-founders and filmmaker James Cameron, Planetary Resources has caused a stir since it issued a cryptic statement this week boldly claiming it could "ensure humanity's prosperity". The company, which was founded earlier this year and has just 20 employees, said it would combine space exploration with mining to develop a method to extract gold, platinum and other precious metals and minerals from asteroids in orbit around the Earth. It suggested that this could "add trillions of dollars to the global GDP". Washington-based Planetary Resources held a press conference at The Museum of Flight in Seattle on Tuesday afternoon, where it unveiled the first step of its long-term plan: a low-cost robotic spacecraft designed for surveying missions. Co-founders Peter Diamandis and Eric Anderson hope to launch their first probe within two years and believe that national agencies such as NASA will be among the first commercial customers. Within 10 years the business intends to diversify into space mining. Mr Diamandis estimates that an asteroid 98 feet long can contain as much as ?31bn in platinum. It could also yield water for consumption by astronauts, or for producing hydrogen fuel for use in future space exploration missions. No details on the size of the financial backing have been revealed, but Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, film director and deep-sea explorer James Cameron and former Microsoft chief software architect Charles Simonyi - a two-time space tourist - have been listed as investors. The company has also recruited a host of talent including NASA Mars mission manager Chris Lewicki and veteran NASA astronaut Tom Jones. My i see the source for this? Also, considering that in about a decade I hope to be an aerospace engineer, this is rather exciting...

2012-04-24 22:00:00 Author: ATMLVE Posts: 1177

---

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17827347

2012-04-25 08:59:00 Author: Rabid-Coot Posts: 6728

---

My i see the source for this? Sorry about that. If you're still interested it's from this article (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/mining/9222766/Planetary-Resources-unveils-cosmic-plan-to-boldly-go-and-mine-asteroids-for-gold-and-platinum.html).

2012-04-25 22:54:00 Author: Ayneh Posts: 2454

Posts: 1077139    Threads: 69970    Members: 9661    Archive-Date: 2019-01-19

Aus dem Archiv wurden alle persönlichen Daten wie Name, Anschrift, Email etc. - aber auch sämtliche Inhalte wie z.B. persönliche Nachrichten - entfernt.
Die Nutzung dieser Webseite erfolgt ohne Speicherung personenbezogener Daten. Es werden keinerlei Cookies, Logs, 3rd-Party-Plugins etc. verwendet.