Comments on: Exclusive SpaceShipTwo unveiling gallery http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html Brain candy for Happy Mutants Wed, 22 May 2013 04:14:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1 By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658944 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658944 Tritty............... You irritate me. How do you feel you have the right to decide on whether or not humanity deserves to try for the Universe? How do you think that reaching the stars is not something to be celebrated? You really feel that we should not try to better ourselves, that we should not try to outdo those who have come before, and defy the seeming inevitabilty of our species demise? First you say we should user the money spent on space exploration to help people, and then you say that the human race as a whole deserves to die.............. The way you think makes no sense! We have the ability to do the amazing, and if we turn our backs on this ability, it makes a mockery of everything humanity has ever achieved. Tritty…………… You irritate me.

How do you feel you have the right to decide on whether or not humanity deserves to try for the Universe? How do you think that reaching the stars is not something to be celebrated?

You really feel that we should not try to better ourselves, that we should not try to outdo those who have come before, and defy the seeming inevitabilty of our species demise?

First you say we should user the money spent on space exploration to help people, and then you say that the human race as a whole deserves to die………….. The way you think makes no sense!

We have the ability to do the amazing, and if we turn our backs on this ability, it makes a mockery of everything humanity has ever achieved.

]]> By: Tritty http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-659456 Tritty Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-659456 Clearly there is a confusion about my opinions and beliefs on this subject and my actual ability to make decisions on this matter, which is nil. I'm certainly glad this has precipitated so much debate but criticizing my opinions makes no sense. why let my opinions irritate you? we have so many ways to appreciate the stars and there are many ways to better ourselves within these confines. Im not suggesting dismantling current satellites, telescopes, other extra-terrestrial systems, etc. and i certainly did not suggest that the human race should all die. at the moment i hope we can help as many living people improve the quality of their lives as possible but lets be realistic 7 billion is too many. I celebrate many human achievements vastly more important to us than space travel. Clearly there is a confusion about my opinions and beliefs on this subject and my actual ability to make decisions on this matter, which is nil. I’m certainly glad this has precipitated so much debate but criticizing my opinions makes no sense. why let my opinions irritate you? we have so many ways to appreciate the stars and there are many ways to better ourselves within these confines. Im not suggesting dismantling current satellites, telescopes, other extra-terrestrial systems, etc. and i certainly did not suggest that the human race should all die. at the moment i hope we can help as many living people improve the quality of their lives as possible but lets be realistic 7 billion is too many. I celebrate many human achievements vastly more important to us than space travel.

]]> By: ackpht http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658438 ackpht Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658438 Recession? What recession? Recession? What recession?

]]> By: Brainspore http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-659462 Brainspore Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-659462 Sabik: if this doesn't count as a spaceship because it's "not useful" then the earliest flying machines don't count as airplanes. As for what it's a stepping stone to: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scaled_Composites_SpaceShipThree">SpaceShipThree</a>, of course! Sabik: if this doesn’t count as a spaceship because it’s “not useful” then the earliest flying machines don’t count as airplanes. As for what it’s a stepping stone to: SpaceShipThree, of course!

]]> By: Rob Beschizza http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658440 Rob Beschizza Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658440 I heard that in an Austrian accent. I heard that in an Austrian accent.

]]> By: arkizzle / Moderator http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658441 arkizzle / Moderator Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658441 Ha! :) Ha! :)

]]> By: damndroid http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658446 damndroid Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658446 spaceman@SpaceShip2: Gr33tings from space!! first msg ever frm outer space, seats are 200 000 bucks! youngjedi@home: ROTFL!! spaceman@SpaceShip2: Gr33tings from space!! first msg ever frm outer space, seats are 200 000 bucks!

youngjedi@home: ROTFL!!

]]> By: MrsBug http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658704 MrsBug Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658704 I'm all for space exploration, if only for the fact that it acts as a catalyst for invention and discovery. How much of the technology we use today is due to NASA and the push for space in the 60s? I’m all for space exploration, if only for the fact that it acts as a catalyst for invention and discovery. How much of the technology we use today is due to NASA and the push for space in the 60s?

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-659728 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-659728 One possible offshoot, not often mentioned, is that sub-orbital space flight is a precursor to long distance supersonic travel. No sonic booms in space. One possible offshoot, not often mentioned, is that sub-orbital space flight is a precursor to long distance supersonic travel.
No sonic booms in space.

]]> By: Sal Paradise http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658962 Sal Paradise Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658962 Space travel after we've fixed all of Earth's problems? So let's see, that will be ...... never. Space travel after we’ve fixed all of Earth’s problems? So let’s see, that will be …… never.

]]> By: dfletcher http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658451 dfletcher Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658451 ackpht: Meh. Two hundred grand a seat and six at a time they'll never run out of customers like that. At least the taxes (heh hopefully the Govenator didn't give them too many loopholes) are going to California. Also I strongly support any step our species takes towards traveling the universe. ackpht: Meh. Two hundred grand a seat and six at a time they’ll never run out of customers like that. At least the taxes (heh hopefully the Govenator didn’t give them too many loopholes) are going to California. Also I strongly support any step our species takes towards traveling the universe.

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658963 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658963 Some things to remember: 1. This is not being funded by public money, but rather private money. 2. This has created a lot of good jobs, in a town that has the highest per-capita welfare rate in California, and in a region that's currently has a 4% higher unemployement rate than the rest of California. 3. Because of this program, during the recession, Scaled has been able to double its work force (show me ANY other regional company that can boast this kind of growth over the same period). 4. This program is a long way off from turning a profit, so that the money that's being spent on it (meaning, being spent to hire talented young brains) is money going from the upper class (the sponsors as well as the future astronauts) to middle class engineers and technicians. 5. The best way to fix things on earth is to a) redistribute some of the wealth, and b) grow technology. This does both, and without any bureaucratic intervention. Some things to remember:
1. This is not being funded by public money, but rather private money.
2. This has created a lot of good jobs, in a town that has the highest per-capita welfare rate in California, and in a region that’s currently has a 4% higher unemployement rate than the rest of California.
3. Because of this program, during the recession, Scaled has been able to double its work force (show me ANY other regional company that can boast this kind of growth over the same period).
4. This program is a long way off from turning a profit, so that the money that’s being spent on it (meaning, being spent to hire talented young brains) is money going from the upper class (the sponsors as well as the future astronauts) to middle class engineers and technicians.
5. The best way to fix things on earth is to a) redistribute some of the wealth, and b) grow technology. This does both, and without any bureaucratic intervention.

]]> By: juepucta http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658452 juepucta Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658452 Whoever is doing Arnolds hair colouring is kinda failing, Lou Dobbs style. -G. Whoever is doing Arnolds hair colouring is kinda failing, Lou Dobbs style.

-G.

]]> By: teapot http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-659482 teapot Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-659482 Tritty: A quick review of my previous comments will show you that I enjoy a good complain on the side of the environment and developing countries... but stop being a troll. Seriously. If this is such an issue for you, then where is your rant about sports cars? I mean, as #30 pointed out, the carbon emissions from 1 flight for 1 passenger is roughly equal to 1 year of car ownership (arguably 3 months ownership of a sports car, as any decent sports car's engine is probably roughly 4 times bigger than your standard passenger car). Futhermore, this flight does not <i>use</i> earth's materials (excluding fuel, and in-flight meal?) like a sports car does. Cars are solid objects, made from resources we tore out of the earth. After use, they will probably eventually end up decaying in a scrap yard somewhere. A flight on this craft is a unique <i>experience</i> which will sell in vastly fewer numbers than annual sports cars sales, so your assertion that it is wasteful is misdireected unless you are willing to go and picket Ferrari on your days off... Pick your fights better, cause the damage:potential_gains ratio here is strongly in favour of the potential_gains. There are way more important things for you to rant about if you care about the environment and inequality. Also worth mentioning that Branson said at the launch that Virgin Galactic was going to operate completely carbon neutral, so I wouldnt be suprised if the carbon offset is already factored into the $200k pricetag. Tritty: A quick review of my previous comments will show you that I enjoy a good complain on the side of the environment and developing countries… but stop being a troll. Seriously.

If this is such an issue for you, then where is your rant about sports cars? I mean, as #30 pointed out, the carbon emissions from 1 flight for 1 passenger is roughly equal to 1 year of car ownership (arguably 3 months ownership of a sports car, as any decent sports car’s engine is probably roughly 4 times bigger than your standard passenger car).

Futhermore, this flight does not use earth’s materials (excluding fuel, and in-flight meal?) like a sports car does. Cars are solid objects, made from resources we tore out of the earth. After use, they will probably eventually end up decaying in a scrap yard somewhere.

A flight on this craft is a unique experience which will sell in vastly fewer numbers than annual sports cars sales, so your assertion that it is wasteful is misdireected unless you are willing to go and picket Ferrari on your days off…

Pick your fights better, cause the damage:potential_gains ratio here is strongly in favour of the potential_gains. There are way more important things for you to rant about if you care about the environment and inequality.

Also worth mentioning that Branson said at the launch that Virgin Galactic was going to operate completely carbon neutral, so I wouldnt be suprised if the carbon offset is already factored into the $200k pricetag.

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658460 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658460 is arnold going to take a ride? or is he there to kill richard branson? is arnold going to take a ride? or is he there to kill richard branson?

]]> By: airshowfan http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658717 airshowfan Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658717 In reply to #12: Once you're past 100km up, it's considered "space"; The air is thin enough that aerodynamic controls no longer work, your drag is so low that it feels like effectively zero g. So Scaled's spaceships do go into space, just not very deep. And for all the people wondering about the carbon footprint... yes, it's the equivalent of many thousands of miles flying in an airliner or driving in a car. If you've ever traveled to another continent, or owned a car for a year, it's about that much. Hey, maybe Virgin will offer carbon offsets as part of the cost (it would certainly be an "affordable" bit of the $200,000). And count me in with the other people who want to be like Burt Rutan when we grow up. (But even cooler was Paul MacCready, who shared Burt's talent for unconventional aircraft design with an environmentalist passion for making the most energy-efficient aircraft humanly possible. First solar-powered aircraft, first human-powered aircraft, first fuel-cell-powered aircraft... The solar-powered Helios, with the wingspan of a 747, could fly higher than a Blackbird, and if it hadn't been destroyed could probably have flown indefinitely when the fuel cells became ready). In reply to #12: Once you’re past 100km up, it’s considered “space”; The air is thin enough that aerodynamic controls no longer work, your drag is so low that it feels like effectively zero g. So Scaled’s spaceships do go into space, just not very deep.

And for all the people wondering about the carbon footprint… yes, it’s the equivalent of many thousands of miles flying in an airliner or driving in a car. If you’ve ever traveled to another continent, or owned a car for a year, it’s about that much. Hey, maybe Virgin will offer carbon offsets as part of the cost (it would certainly be an “affordable” bit of the $200,000).

And count me in with the other people who want to be like Burt Rutan when we grow up. (But even cooler was Paul MacCready, who shared Burt’s talent for unconventional aircraft design with an environmentalist passion for making the most energy-efficient aircraft humanly possible. First solar-powered aircraft, first human-powered aircraft, first fuel-cell-powered aircraft… The solar-powered Helios, with the wingspan of a 747, could fly higher than a Blackbird, and if it hadn’t been destroyed could probably have flown indefinitely when the fuel cells became ready).

]]> By: yri http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658726 yri Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658726 I just don't get folks who say we shouldn't bother with space until we clean up our act down here somehow. I think that our problems on Earth make it even more important that we expand our inquiry as far and wide as possible. Solutions are very often found in the most unexpected places. The more places we explore, the more chance we have of finding the very answers we need to fix problems here on the ground. IMO. Plus there's that whole 'eggs in one basket' bit. And, hey, it's cool! I just don’t get folks who say we shouldn’t bother with space until we clean up our act down here somehow. I think that our problems on Earth make it even more important that we expand our inquiry as far and wide as possible.

Solutions are very often found in the most unexpected places. The more places we explore, the more chance we have of finding the very answers we need to fix problems here on the ground. IMO. Plus there’s that whole ‘eggs in one basket’ bit.

And, hey, it’s cool!

]]> By: Tritty http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-659496 Tritty Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-659496 this article is on space travel. not sports cars. so what do u mean "this flight does not use earth's materials? where do they get spacecraft materials from? space? and aren't fuel and food two of the most exhaustive processes for the earth? i will continue being a troll if thats what it means to respect your progenitor more than your reputation this article is on space travel. not sports cars. so what do u mean “this flight does not use earth’s materials? where do they get spacecraft materials from? space? and aren’t fuel and food two of the most exhaustive processes for the earth? i will continue being a troll if thats what it means to respect your progenitor more than your reputation

]]> By: spacecat http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658733 spacecat Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658733 I reckon we are on the edge of extinction at the moment but stopping science is a bad way to solve the problem, even if space flight appears counter intuitive. Wish I could afford the trip! I reckon we are on the edge of extinction at the moment but stopping science is a bad way to solve the problem, even if space flight appears counter intuitive. Wish I could afford the trip!

]]> By: vetnoir http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-659245 vetnoir Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-659245 All the arguments about if this is a spaceship or if it is useful or whatever mean nothing to me. Because this thing is about as cool as it is possible to get. And the fact that it is that cool transcends all those arguments. And one of these when they will take you up and let you skydive from it, I'll be one of the first guy's in line... All the arguments about if this is a spaceship or if it is useful or whatever mean nothing to me. Because this thing is about as cool as it is possible to get. And the fact that it is that cool transcends all those arguments.

And one of these when they will take you up and let you skydive from it, I’ll be one of the first guy’s in line…

]]> By: Chris Spurgeon http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-659248 Chris Spurgeon Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-659248 Makes no sense. The entire purpose of DNA is to replicate. It's what every species does, every organism. DNA tries to survive and spread. 'Success' is determined not by aesthetics, or "rightness" but merely by how well a particular DNA strand's successors survive to reproduce themselves. Well, no, actually it's phenotypes that try to survive and spread. DNA is just part of the mechanism. Richard Dawkins wrote a good book on the principle back in the 80s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_phenotype Makes no sense. The entire purpose of DNA is to replicate. It’s what every species does, every organism. DNA tries to survive and spread. ‘Success’ is determined not by aesthetics, or “rightness” but merely by how well a particular DNA strand’s successors survive to reproduce themselves.

Well, no, actually it’s phenotypes that try to survive and spread. DNA is just part of the mechanism. Richard Dawkins wrote a good book on the principle back in the 80s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_phenotype

]]> By: ZippySpincycle http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658481 ZippySpincycle Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658481 And they're calling it the "VSS Enterprise"--as a commenter on the earlier thread said, the tears are a bit close to the surface for this old geek. Always struck me as a cheat that NASA's first shuttle testbed got the "Enterprise" name but never went to space. And they’re calling it the “VSS Enterprise”–as a commenter on the earlier thread said, the tears are a bit close to the surface for this old geek. Always struck me as a cheat that NASA’s first shuttle testbed got the “Enterprise” name but never went to space.

]]> By: Guysmiley http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658738 Guysmiley Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658738 <i>The "badminton cock" design allows SpaceShipTwo to re-enter the atmosphere as slower speeds than the Shuttle, producing less heat.</i> Errrr, no. The Space Shuttle re-enters the atmosphere going about 17,000 MPH, because it's an ORBITAL spacecraft. It goes up, but it also goes "sideways" fast enough so that when it falls back towards Earth it misses. SpaceShipTwo goes straight up and then straight back down, so the speeds involved are much, much lower. The "shuttlecock" design makes re-entry carefree, in that the vehicle is aerodynamically very stable in the un-hinged configuration so there is very little risk of coming in at the wrong angle and getting into some kind of uncontrollable tumble. The “badminton cock” design allows SpaceShipTwo to re-enter the atmosphere as slower speeds than the Shuttle, producing less heat.

Errrr, no. The Space Shuttle re-enters the atmosphere going about 17,000 MPH, because it’s an ORBITAL spacecraft. It goes up, but it also goes “sideways” fast enough so that when it falls back towards Earth it misses.

SpaceShipTwo goes straight up and then straight back down, so the speeds involved are much, much lower. The “shuttlecock” design makes re-entry carefree, in that the vehicle is aerodynamically very stable in the un-hinged configuration so there is very little risk of coming in at the wrong angle and getting into some kind of uncontrollable tumble.

]]> By: Clay http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658483 Clay Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658483 2009, first commercial spacecraft... I think we're <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetes">mostly on schedule</a> so far. 2009, first commercial spacecraft… I think we’re mostly on schedule so far.

]]> By: teapot http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-659511 teapot Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-659511 Tritty tritty, dont get shitty. You are saying: "This is wasteful. Divert energy into real problems first" I am saying: "Other things which you accept without question are much more wasteful and provide less potential benefits. Rant about them before you rant about this" <i>please explain how ones opinion can be wrong. and brush up on your grammar</i> <b>do you mean "one's"?</b> If you are going to be a nit-picking asshole... here we go: <i>this article is on space travel.</i><b>capital t? - comma instead of full stop?</b><i> not sports cars. so what do u mean "this flight does not use earth's materials?</i><b>capital s? - how about closing your quotes? Should I also mention that you completely misquoted me? Someone's opinion can be wrong when it is guided by bullshit and disproportionate in scope... like yours. <i>where do they get spacecraft materials from? space? and aren't fuel and food two of the most exhaustive processes for the earth?</i> OK.... I will slow this down so you can keep up, because you are obviously having trouble... A car is made of metal. When we buy a car, we buy that metal. It is out metal. Noone can take that metal from us or even (properly) put it back in the earth where it came from. When you fly on this craft... you RENT IT. Noone is stupid enough to suggest that if we shared cars there would be more consumption (thats the entire principle behind public transport). [So that's one for the VSS Enterprise] Cars take fuel.... This craft takes fuel. Not many people could afford to fly on this craft every year. Hundreds of thousands of people can afford, and do pay for, fuel to operate their cars every year. [So that's another for the VSS Enterprise] People have to eat. Are you suggesting we dont eat? Awesome problem-solving skillz you got there, I'm so impressed. Please... keep trolling... You look smarter with every post.. No, seriously! (No, not seriously.) Tritty tritty, dont get shitty.

You are saying: “This is wasteful. Divert energy into real problems first”

I am saying: “Other things which you accept without question are much more wasteful and provide less potential benefits. Rant about them before you rant about this”

please explain how ones opinion can be wrong. and brush up on your grammar
do you mean “one’s”?

If you are going to be a nit-picking asshole… here we go:
this article is on space travel.capital t? – comma instead of full stop? not sports cars. so what do u mean “this flight does not use earth’s materials?capital s? – how about closing your quotes? Should I also mention that you completely misquoted me?

Someone’s opinion can be wrong when it is guided by bullshit and disproportionate in scope… like yours.

where do they get spacecraft materials from? space? and aren’t fuel and food two of the most exhaustive processes for the earth?

OK…. I will slow this down so you can keep up, because you are obviously having trouble… A car is made of metal. When we buy a car, we buy that metal. It is out metal. Noone can take that metal from us or even (properly) put it back in the earth where it came from. When you fly on this craft… you RENT IT. Noone is stupid enough to suggest that if we shared cars there would be more consumption (thats the entire principle behind public transport). [So that's one for the VSS Enterprise]

Cars take fuel…. This craft takes fuel. Not many people could afford to fly on this craft every year. Hundreds of thousands of people can afford, and do pay for, fuel to operate their cars every year. [So that's another for the VSS Enterprise]

People have to eat. Are you suggesting we dont eat? Awesome problem-solving skillz you got there, I’m so impressed.

Please… keep trolling… You look smarter with every post.. No, seriously!

(No, not seriously.)

]]> By: Lobster http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658744 Lobster Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658744 Ahnuld: This will take people to Mahs. It must be stopped. Ahnuld: This will take people to Mahs. It must be stopped.

]]> By: Clay http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658491 Clay Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658491 Think of today as March 31, 1951, the day the UNIVAC I, the first commercially-available computer, shipped. It's gigantic, it costs hundreds of thousands (millions in 2009) of dollars, and it will still be years until computers are even measured in MHz or flops. But here it is. It's the beginning. It's a slow beginning. But, bit by bit, this is eventually gonna change everything. Think of today as March 31, 1951, the day the UNIVAC I, the first commercially-available computer, shipped. It’s gigantic, it costs hundreds of thousands (millions in 2009) of dollars, and it will still be years until computers are even measured in MHz or flops. But here it is. It’s the beginning. It’s a slow beginning. But, bit by bit, this is eventually gonna change everything.

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658492 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658492 Ice sculptures to celebrate the most C02 intensive amusement park ride on earth - those people have a well-honed sense of irony. Ice sculptures to celebrate the most C02 intensive amusement park ride on earth – those people have a well-honed sense of irony.

]]> By: Lobster http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-658748 Lobster Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-658748 I think people say we need to worry about Earth first for three reasons: 1) With present technology, it would cost far more to colonize another world than to fix this one. 2) The most habitable planets and moons we can reach are still far, far less hospitable than underdeveloped places on earth, such as the arctic. 3) If we don't learn how to do things right we're just going to end up screwing up another planet and it's possible (unlikely, but possible) that we will NEVER get interstellar travel working. I think people say we need to worry about Earth first for three reasons:

1) With present technology, it would cost far more to colonize another world than to fix this one.
2) The most habitable planets and moons we can reach are still far, far less hospitable than underdeveloped places on earth, such as the arctic.
3) If we don’t learn how to do things right we’re just going to end up screwing up another planet and it’s possible (unlikely, but possible) that we will NEVER get interstellar travel working.

]]> By: Anonymous http://boingboing.net/2009/12/07/spaceshiptwo-unveili.html#comment-659521 Anonymous Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-659521 SS2 and WK2 are made, principally, out of carbon fiber. Thus, they are a good permanent repository for carbon. Therefore we should build many, many more as a way of storing excess carbon. See...it IS good for the environment! SS2 and WK2 are made, principally, out of carbon fiber. Thus, they are a good permanent repository for carbon. Therefore we should build many, many more as a way of storing excess carbon. See…it IS good for the environment!

]]>