Telegraph : Felix Baumgartner, in his first major interview, tells Mark Hughes why travelling to Mars is a waste of money, takes aim at Sir Richard Branson, and explains how his life has changed since his record space jump.
Its a highly debatable topic , should we invest so much in space exploration or not , in my opinion yes we should as one single invention or a cure of some disease can be found can cause big revolution . And will benefit the living on earth .
Yup... That's what I also strongly believe in. If we could just set our priorities right. Hunger, poverty and disease eradication must top everyone's list and maximum resources must be dedicated for this purpose.
If Felix has found something interesting or valuable he would have said its very delightful and some more such missions should be conducted , and he would have also said " I did it " lol , things do get change according to the situation .
Tell me again how they are going to develop a cure for diseases by blasting rocks and taking pictures on Mars?
Space Magic, that's how. Space Magic.
They are not going on mars for playing and blasting rocks , they collect samples and try to find something useful .
@veni vidi vici It's not necessarily what they find that could help, its all the technology that is pioneered in trying to develop new ideas. In the US, interest in science and technology has dropped tremendously in the last few decades, something that can easily be correlated to the US decline worldwide. Historically, the society with the most advanced technology has been the leader of the world or known world at the time. We owe a majority of our current technological roots to the space race of the 60's. Telecommunication satellites, microprocessors, and fabrication techniques for modern items like cell phones, computer processors, etc, all have beginnings from the mercury, gemini, and apollo missions. It's a shame that people nowadays do not correlate these things and think that space is a waste of time! With a little more education we could swing back into the powerhouse that we used to be and make more breakthroughts P.S. We no longer have any manned space flight as the shuttle was cancelled. We now rely on Russian space craft to get to orbit... The US RELIES ON RUSSIAN SPACECRAFT!!!! Meanwhile the Chinese are launching people into space and building space stations and have their sights set on colonizing the moon. If we don't get our act together and start thinking about the future, we could be seeing nothing but RED in the night sky!
@guitar Half of those things you listed were made out of necessity of space travel. Those technologies weren't found floating in space. Similar innovations could be made for say, deep ocean exploration or even no implied reason at all, and it would cost significantly less billions. If anyone is proof that science still happens WITHIN our atmosphere (even if barely, lol), it's Felix. He collected data.....he didn't just jump for fun.
The higher likelihood is the bringing back of a pathogen or something that would effect us in a negative way. Even here on earth people always wonder of the marvels of discovery and the potential of good while ignoring all the non-native species that destroy our ecosystem. By being uprooted from native habitat and brought in to a new host environment to find it has no natural enemies or selective restrictions to it. A single pathogen could possibly be dormant and thrive once it hits a new host environment of Earth. Sounds like a movie... but the theory of negative discovery over useful scientific discovery is often over looked.
So what? We don't take the risk? I might just live in a titanium underground box because I may die upon exit. We must take risks to progress. As long as we are cautious that risk will be within acceptable levels. Another thing is that the relationship between funding and research breakthroughs is not proportional, but exponential. Eventually, scientists will have more than they need, and each penny beyond that will be wasted on little progress. The marginal utility of funding decreases as we put more into research. Hence, to maximise utility we must spread our money across health, the environment and space.
No but risk assessment is made and I was only commenting on the "yes we should as one single invention or a cure of some disease can be found can cause big revolution . And will benefit the living on earth ." remark. As the likelihood of a greater harm to earth is more a possibility then a cure of a disease. Also, scientist will never have more money then they need... because the search for new scientific data also is exponential as the information we discover brings about new and more interesting scientific possibilities. Just the discovery of DNA and how it is associated with our life has caused numerous research and development research and is a never ending quest for more discovery within it. Scientific knowledge is the truest form of exponential growth. With each new discovery bring more and more questions. Costs... will NEVER go down.
What are you, stupid*? Didn't you see War of the Worlds? They'll die from our colds! lol @Spartan You mock someone for having concerns of pathogens, but it's perfectly balanced to rant about how we will will, within great certainty, find a revolutionary cure? *I'm not really calling you stupid. JK
exactly we don't know whats out there. could be a random element on mars that could, as agentwhite said, cure a disease or maybe provide a source of renewable energy
Lol Agent... my comment was regardless of what Felix did :P
He's clearly not the most academic of individuals. Why can't we do both? I'd divert money from the exponential human population farms of Africa towards the environment and Mars. This really does come down to a question of priorities, and as both may be equally important in a hundred years time, why not choose balance? We need to send a crew of pioneers to Mars on a no-return mission to set up a base there, making it far more useful for it's cost. In the future we'll need Mars (possibly terraformed) to keep up with our growing population, and to keep the global economy growing. This man's ignorance is unforgivable, and he's exploiting his position as a pseudo-celebrity to achieve goals which are counter to those of people far, far smarter than he is. I for one trust scientists and economists over some random idiot who might have died for a bit of fame.
Never trust an economists... he is in it for the money. Never trust a scientist... they prefer discovery over realistic expectations of the use of their worst discoveries. (The A-Bomb?)
You know what the terms scientist and economist mean? Economist doesn't mean banker, and scientists aren't people who without moderation would not care about morality. Bad things have come out of science, but if were to stop trusting scientists, I think far worse things would follow. And some economists (such as Peter Schiff) do use their predictions to earn money (Schiff sells gold), but most of them earn their paycheck by teaching others about economy, or by consistently making reliable predictions.
I believe the universe is as important as our earth in terms of discovering for more knowledge and development. Just as scouring our earth and doing reasearch have given us advanced medicine,tech, better control of life and understanding of it. In the similar way the universe may hold many good and bad surprises and we have to deal with it eventually. Many of Earth's valuable resources came from comets who knows what may actually be lurking in the universe that could benefit us.
Little steps are needed to ensure the survival of humanity as a species, Earth wont last forever and if we don't end up killing ourselves before this planet gives out then space is our only future.
Just because of one leap doesn't necessarily mean we have to believe every word this guy says.. I just think he's not thinking outside the box about the sort of ideas what space exploration has done to advance our speculative knowledge.
just because he's the 1 lucky bastard to have gotten the support needed to do what he did, doesn't qualify him to make such a bold statement! it's kinda ironic for him to say such thing as what he did was nothing short of money-wasting at its finest! who did benefit from it? himself, Redbull and Google - THAT's IT! all of those were done for fame and not a single penny goes to what he says as "saving the earth" in any way possible! so, just shut up and enjoy your short-lived fame while you can! those at NASA and other researches are trying to do things for the entire human race, not just for themselves like you did for yourself!
High altitude bailouts? Commercial space flight? Applied physics? There was more going on there than just a guy jumping out of a balloon. Something doesn't cease to exist just because you can't see it.
And yet Red Bull had just spent millions of dollars so that we watch a man jumped from the edge of space. Millions that would be more suited for cancer research or solving environmental issues. Just like the billions NASA used to send probes to other planets. And the billions that astronauts and rocket engineers had wasted in collecting data for decades that helped him survive the climb and fall from the edge space. Some of these guys broke their bones and future in the pursuit of science and wrote the safety guidelines for future explorers. A plutonium powered drone was sent to blast rocks on a distant planet. Wasteful? Not if you factor in the diamond planets they've discovered scattered all about the universe. Billions wasted now for experiments that are deemed of little value for current world problems might come in handy for hundreds of generations in the future when they are exploring the cosmos. Billions and trillions of dollars have been used for things like poverty, environmental and health issues for decades so another adding another billion or so might not necessarily accelerate their progress. If the quest for space exploration if considered wasteful then I guess the same goes for paleontology.
No stupid we need a backup planet, in case this one is hit by another global extinction causing meteor or we get hit by a supernova's gamma ray burst. And i'll bet a thousand dollars some fool called harnessing electricity a waste of money. It might be a waste in our lifetime, but 4 or 5 centuries from now it might be a wise investment, if not less. This dumbass is a adrenaline junkie not a scientist or someone that has extensive knowledge in any relevant field. Just because your "famous" doesn't make what you have to say anymore relevant than another joe blow off of the streets.
Well spending money to jump from 128K feet.. it is a waste of money!
Oh the irony
ultimately, if humanity wants to survive, and i'm talking long term here, we can't just be stuck on this one ball of dirt. that is a very precarious position. there are things out there that can wipe out almost all life on earth. and unlike the movies, i bet if a 500 mile wide asteroid was headed for earth we wouldn't have any way of stopping it. it's like the phrase, don't keep all your eggs in one basket. but with humanity on multiple planets, total extinction, is a lot less likely. i know that's a very long term view, but it has to start sometime, the sooner the better i reckon.
TechSpy is a community of awesome people posting and discussing the latest tech news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.