On 6/3/2018 4:17 PM, a425couple wrote:
> On 6/3/2018 11:26 AM, Kevrob wrote:
>> On Sunday, June 3, 2018 at 1:29:35 PM UTC-4, a425couple wrote:
>>> from
>>>
http://thehill.com/opinion/technology/390092-when-did-we-stop-thinking-big-save-the-international-space-station
>>>
>>> (Or - when did our future plans start to wildly separate
>>> from our good sci-fi books?)
>>
>> Or: Texas pols are defending their pork?
>>
>> I could be convince that keeping the High Ground might be
>> a military necessity, but other than that, the whole "the Feds
>> have top pay for basic science" rationale, is, as a general rule,
>> unconstitutional.
>> Kevin R
>
> It sounds like you definitely believe that exploration,
> and colonization of space should be up to private
> citizens and corporations.
> Is that true?
>
> So, the debate of how much searching we should do
> on Mars for existing life, would be rapidly put
> aside for one organization's determination to
> create and disseminate our alterations of life?
>
> And Mars should be colonized if a way can be found
> to do it profitably?
>
> (As in the debate that got resolved by somewhat
> unilateral private action in Kim Stanley Robinson's
> "Red Mars".)
Are their any good sci-fi novels, that have a
wide open rush into space, as in a modernized
version of:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_Rush_of_1889
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cimarron_(1960_film)
"Tom, whose own oil-rich land has made him wealthy, laughs
and says that it is he, not the Indians, who owns the oil rights."
Hmmm, if there are Martians, like the ones Robert
Heinlein wrote about in "Stranger in a Strange Land",
that might not go well!!!!!!!!!!! For them, or for
all of Earth!
But, in a way, the Oklahoma Land Rush, was not as
much anarchy, as a rush into space might become.
After all, the U. S. government was in control.