[net.space] "Long Term Implications of Challenger Accident"

Gloger.es@XEROX.COM (02/10/86)

Ed Turner made the coment that, "Much greater risks and losses [than
Challenger's] have been accepted for the initial exploration of all
historic frontiers ...."  "Piermarini" observed "... but do we stop the
manufacture of automobiles when there's an accident?"  I sympathize
entirely with the sentiments in these and many similar comments made in
this forum.

However, there seems here to be a staggering lack of recognition of the
terrible consequences of the fact that this particular "exploration of
frontiers" is being done by the government, that if the manufacture of
automobiles was done by the government then you could be sure that it
would be stopped whenever there's an accident.  You might say that then
there would be almost no automobiles, and you would be all too painfully
correct, as witness those parts of the world where automobiles are made
only by the government.

Does anybody remember the last time in history when a government
operation successfully "explored a historic frontier?"  Yeah, me
neither.

Paul Gloger

kendalla@orca.UUCP (Kendall Auel) (02/12/86)

In article <860210-065500-1155@Xerox> Gloger.es@XEROX.COM writes:
>
>Does anybody remember the last time in history when a government
>operation successfully "explored a historic frontier?"

Ever heard of Lewis and Clark?

Last week on Saturday Night Live:
	Why is it that newscasters feel obliged to change the name of
	a planet just because its embarassing to say over the air? What's
	so bad about telling 20 million viewers that scientists have
	discovered black rings around UrAnus??
I was wondering about that...

eugene@ames.UUCP (Eugene Miya) (02/17/86)

> Does anybody remember the last time in history when a government
> operation successfully "explored a historic frontier?"  Yeah, me
> neither.
> 
> Paul Gloger

I can remember many.
We had, what I considered, an important ocean program which died with
the death of one aquanaut off the CA coast in the late 1960s.
We want to go into space without exploring 70% of our own planet.
Much of this work is military related.  What happened to the industrial
use of the ocean?  Well, it turns out Mn Nodules are not as high
quality and plentiful as first believed.  You also need more than
Mn.  {same as with space: you need more than loncrete, O2, etc.}

We must not belittle the efforts of the USGS, the purchases of Alaska,
Lousiana (oops, sp) [I recognize we took a lot, too].

What about the non-physical frontiers such as nuclear energy and
attempts of build great societies thru education [I was educated
in the latter, and many of my doors are now closed to others].

I think many of these programs died for complex combinations of reasons.
The economic risks are great.  The social biases are interesting.
Many people don't so see as we do about the uses of space.  Rather
than say, "They are blind" I try to ask myself what do they see that I don't.
I also ask how can I convince them of the importance of my viewpoint.
Occasionally, I succeed; I typically fail: that is the nature of debate,
one rarely converts one's opponents.

See the similarity of our arguments with historical record.  We have
great differences, too: we don't send POMEs (pardons to the English
and Australians) into space.  Most of the arguments for going into the
sea were the same as going into space. Mostly the scales were
different.

--eugene miya
  NASA Ames Research Center
  {hplabs,ihnp4,dual,hao,decwrl,allegra}!ames!aurora!eugene
  eugene@ames-nas.ARPA

friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) (02/17/86)

In article <860210-065500-1155@Xerox> Gloger.es@XEROX.COM writes:
>Ed Turner made the coment that, "Much greater risks and losses [than
>Challenger's] have been accepted for the initial exploration of all
>historic frontiers ...."  "Piermarini" observed "... but do we stop the
>manufacture of automobiles when there's an accident?"
>
>However, there seems here to be a staggering lack of recognition of the
>terrible consequences of the fact that this particular "exploration of
>frontiers" is being done by the government,
>
>Does anybody remember the last time in history when a government
>operation successfully "explored a historic frontier?"

        Well, I seem to remember that Columbus's voyages were financed
by the Spanish government. And I think Magellan's vaoyage was also a
government venture. And Captain Drake was another government explorer.
And, I may be wrong, but I think that the HMS Beagle was a government
survey vessel, and look what came out of that!
--

                                Sarima (Stanley Friesen)

UUCP: {ttidca|ihnp4|sdcrdcf|quad1|nrcvax|bellcore|logico}!psivax!friesen
ARPA: ttidca!psivax!friesen@rand-unix.arpa