/sci/ - Science & Math

>>5821604
not practical

>>5821611
Still possible

>>5821604
Entire cities drowning. If I've learned anything from futuristic movies, it's that there will be terrorists and lots of them. The last thing you want is half of the human race underwater.

>>5821624
How can it be drowning, if it's been underwater the ENTIRE time?

>I learned from movies
no

Why wouldn't you want half the race underwater? It would solve many problems.

>underwater
Can't see it happening unless there is a good nuclear exchange or other sort of big event though not large enough to purge humanity.

>>5821633
You're retarded. He was suggesting water leaking into developments due to terrorism/bombings and such. This thread is retarded. And why are you posting stupid what-if threads in /sci/? Go away.

>>5821637
I'm not talking all of humanity needs to live there. I'm talking a hundred thousand maximum.

>>5821644
>What is body scanner?
>What is police?
>What is not allowing suspicious parts into the settlement

Remind me, why do they want to blow the settlement up?

>>5821645
So another base like Antartica? As soon as deep sea gets enough budget a research base could be set, but it is quite probably economically impractical compared to subs.

>>5821651
I'd say bigger than Antarctica, Antarctica has about 4,000 people stationed at the research base.

I was thinking a little bigger than that, I wouldn't imagine it'd be a bustling city, but I don't think it'd be that small.

Too dangerous.
Too expensive.
Too cool.

>>5821649
Allah

>>5821666
/pol/
It's to the left of /sci/.

>>5821670
this thread isn't /sci/ to begin with

purely "what if" doesn't belong here.

now if you had brought up something along the lines of actual evidence that this was not only very possible at the moment but also practical, then it suddenly becomes a verifiable /sci/ thread.

srry bb cakes

seems like an ocean colony would be a really good at simulating what a space colony might be like in the future, all food is grown inside the colony, waste recycled, etc.

someone should do a cost analysis for how much one would cost

>>5821684
and now it's a /sci/ thread!

>>5821676
>All science and math related topics welcome.
This is related to science.

>now if you had brought up something along the lines of actual evidence
Wrong, science speculation goes here.

>that this was not only very possible at the moment but also practical
What does that even mean? Something has to be practical to go here? It has to be possible right now?

Fix your grammar, it's horrendous.

Sure. Why go to outer space to look for weird aliens when you can go under the waves?

The bottom of the ocean is like an alien planet.

I used to thing this freaky fish were really neat.

I even did a school project on them.

Just imagine what could be at the bottom of the Challenger Deep.

I'm more in favor of draining off the ocean a bit.
Mo land mo money mo bitches

>>5821762
but that's a picture of mars lol

>>5821762
Yeah im sorry, I didn't have time to render a model of earth with less water.

Secret Underwater Bases

lauralee.com/index.cgi?pid=3331

This is an explosive, eye-opening sequel to the author's best-selling Underground Bases and Tunnels. He lays out the amazing evidence and government paper trail for the construction of huge, manned bases offshore, in mid-ocean, and deep beneath the sea floor. Bases big enough to secretly dock submarines! Official United States Navy documents, and other hard evidence, raise many questions about what really lies 20,000 leagues beneath the sea. Many UFOs have been seen coming and going from the world's oceans, seas and lakes, implying the existence of secret underwater bases. Hold onto your hats: Jules Verne may not have been so far from the truth, after all! Dr Sauder also adds to his incredible database of underground bases onshore. New, breakthrough material reveals the existence of additional clandestine underground facilities as well as the surprising location of one of the CIA's own underground bases. Plus, new information on tunnelling and cutting-edge, high speed rail magnetic-levitation (MagLev) technology. This book carefully examines the evidence and comes to a thought-provoking conclusion.
Additional information from Dr. Richard Sauder


Further Official U.S. Navy Documentation

Is there any more documentation from the U.S. Navy with regard to undersea bases? As it happens, there is. In 1972 the U.S. Navy published another report that discussed "undersea ports". The Report is entitled, "Subsurface Deployment of Naval Facilities." The document cites live sorts of facilities which the future Navy might situate underground.

>No MadScientist ;_;

>>5821797
>pedophile roleplayer

>>5821807
lel


On topic human could colonize the oceans but there is no real point in doing so in mass.
Some settlements here and there will happen but there is not major reason to go beyond that, it's not like we have run out from space on land.
>near the underwater volcanic magma vents
Try shallow oceans in front of big cities or somewhere interesting like corall reefs.

By modifying our bodies through extensive bioengineering (using retroviruses). This will enable us to withstand extremely high pressures, extract oxygen from water, and have better/more sensitive vision underwater.
See the Rifters trilogy by Peter Watts

>>5821649
Man you are just fucking retarded.
I won't explain it because I don't want to waste time with you, but I wanted to tell you so you could think about it.

>>5821885
Is that even remotely possible? I get it's possible, but...really?

I'm no expert, but surely the construction would not be that problematic. For a small base/research center you could simply construct it at the surface and then sink it deep below. You could then just anchor it to the sea bed. If you want to expand the colony you would simply just sink another module or two.

>explore the galaxy
>humans never got past the moon
Why do phaggots like water so much? You can boil the seas and burn the land, but you can't take the skies from me phaggot.
turf>surf

>>5821719
>mfw my friend says "but think of the space babes!!!"
>tell him a catfish is probably more fuckable than a spacebabe would ever be

Why would we want to live underwater?

>>5822051
Why not?

Why the fuck would anyone colonize the ocean? What a retarded idea. Of course building undersea labs might make sense, but an entire city underwater? No. It's uneconimical and utterly pointless. You might as well ask how to colonize the sun.

>>5821604
House boats and algae farms. The trick is to make it cheap enough that when we push them into the sea they're not so pissed about it.

>>5821885
How far away are we from actually being able to use bioengineering to remodel our bodies? Any bio/med fags in this thread?

>>5822077
>You might as well ask how to colonize the sun.
At night, of course.

>>5821762
..are...are you fucking retarded? Do you know how much water would you need to remove to lower global water level for just a single meter?

>>5821624
> Entire cities drowning.
And how would a terrorist group even get down to the city? Ride a dolphin?

The residents would have to be screened to weed out suicidal bombers and the like. Same as you would for a space colony.

> I'm more in favor of draining off the ocean a bit.
Um, and put the water where?

>>5822165
>And how would a terrorist group even get down to the city? Ride a dolphin?
>How would arabs even get to the USA? Ride on a flamingo?

>>5822160
>what is satire/sarcasm/wit

fucking autist

>>5822173
Aah, the "I'm not retarded, I'm actually trolling ;) ;)" ruse, I admit, I fell for it.

>>5821676
>purely "what if" doesn't belong here.
The United Arab Emirates already creates artificial islands in any shape you want. All it takes is a lot of dirt - which they have - and money.

>>5822077
> Why the fuck would anyone colonize the ocean?
Beyond the 12-mile limit, you are in international territory. You would be able to rule your own country without any of the messiness of a revolution or warlords getting in your way.

> It's uneconimical and utterly pointless.
Corporations could headquarter underwater and pay NO taxes. Hell, they could be their entire nation unto themselves. The Nation of Microsoft.

Pepsi. The nation for a new generation.

>>5822181
Generation P, gotta love pelevin.

>>5822181
>Beyond the 12-mile limit, you are in international territory. You would be able to rule your own country without any of the messiness of a revolution or warlords getting in your way.
Is this actually true? What if the rest of the world doesn't like your new nation, or its ideology? What's stopping the USA from sending a couple of subs to wreck your shit? Hell, they've waged war for much less.

>inb4 muh democracy!!

>>5822181
You do realize that they can just change the rules if mircosoft would escape into the ocean.

Or they could just conquer you, if you are not paying taxes you are not going to be protected.

>>5822069
>Why not?

Seriously?

>>5822181

What the fuck is the point of being UNDER water?

>>5821624
>hurr durr space is better
>>5821604
>underwater volcanic magma vent
>>5821762
>full retard
The land would be incredibly salinated and full of rotting plants and animals .

>>5822193
Yeah

Economics Stupid.
And while it IS international waters aka declare your own nation, it takes the RECOGNITION of other nations to have it hold water, ha ha, and be recognized. To be recognized generally requires
a) a population of at least 100 people or so (larger the better)
b) self sufficiency of some sort aka make own power, produce own food, electronics, ect...
c) EXPORTS OF VALUE, not just internet business or tax shoring, needs to have definite future value ie investors would invest
d) Own infrastructure, along with ability to handle rising water levels, disasters aka insurance, grow aka more land and resources ie import garbage (usually paid for this) and recycle for materials and additional land would work
e) defineable government and methods of keeping law and order aka accountability
f) good RELATIONS with other nations even if only ONE MAJOR NATION, better two of different political and national interests
g) Name, Flag, anthem, the whole nine yards and people that CONSISTANTLY call themselves your nations people, with recognizeable visa/ passports.

>>5822216
>anthem
>anything but this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgA2xo0HYrE

All you will find under the ocean is all the shit we've been dumping into it over the past 300 or so years.

>>5822228
or maybe some goddamn booty-filled chests, you never know till you dive.

There are lots of benefits, like having an almost infinite water supply for drinking, showering, cooking, toilets etc., but it would be hard to keep such a building stable, since the sand on the bottom of the ocean floor shifts.

>>5822231
>There are lots of benefits, like having an almost infinite water supply for drinking
Y'know, you can get the same amount of water with pumps, right? There's no benefit living underwater that living above water on massive mobile artificial islands would not also have. Or, y'know, living on land.

>>5822237
I'd hate to live in the same biodome as you, you'd turn the whole water supply into diarrhea. Who the fuck would like to live there? You deserve to stay on land and in diapers, so you don't shit everywhere there too.

>>5822241
Nice ad hominem and everything. So have you given up and decided to start trulling?

>>5822183
> What's stopping the USA from sending a couple of subs to wreck your shit?
What's stopping the USA from sending bombers into Canada? Or setting up a democracy in Saudi Arabia?

The US doesn't attack its allies.
> Inb4 yet.

>You do realize that they can just change the rules if microsoft would escape into the ocean.
Yeah, because Congress and the IRS has done a bang up job lately.

>What the fuck is the point of being UNDER water?
As opposed to what? In orbit? On the moon? On mars?

Underwater is impractical, risky, but cool.

I would rather have a massive linked network of surface rafts/floating islands that are essentially your city nation/food production.

But support it economically with a decent submersible contingent for research/exploration/mining the ocean floor.

It could work.

If only you could get cleared for nuclear power...what does that take? A pretty fucking powerful military most likely.

So maybe independence isn't the greatest idea.

>>5822242
You know why they don't let little kids swim in the pool without adult supervision? You'll never go in without floaties.

>>5822243
>As opposed to what? In orbit? On the moon? On mars?
Or on land?

>Yeah, because Congress and the IRS has done a bang up job lately.
That's irrelevant to the point he was making

>The US doesn't attack its allies.
Yet. So maybe not the US. Say you have a resource or an ideology that an unstable nation, let's say North Korea, wants to claim and or destroy. Nothing stops this from happening.

Living underwater is such a giant waste of resources. There are enough problems on land to solve.`

>>5822243
>What's stopping the USA from sending bombers into Canada? Or setting up a democracy in Saudi Arabia?
They are regoniced sovereign nations, you aren't

>The US doesn't attack its allies.
You aren't it's ally

And you are forgetting that it doesn't have to be US, it could be me and couple of my frieds, there are no laws stopping us either. Unless other nations regocnize you as sovereign nation you are under the rule of guy with the bigges guns. Looks up sealand if you wanna know more.

>As opposed to what? In orbit? On the moon? On mars?
Land.
You should still asnwer the guestion, awoiding it doesn't actually do much.

>>5822247
Cool.

>>5822250
never

Mining resources from the bottom of the ocean are the only way I could see this ever working. It's the only model that could be even remotely economical.

Even then you're not down there with families, or a community. Just a select group of specialists doing their thing.

>>5822253
I'm sure underwater communities will be a thing in the future, underwater hotels for example are too big of a deal to pass by.
I don't see a reason to make cities for "regular" people there though. Maybe in front of some cities like tokyo, but even then, either landfilling the ocean or building from the floor all the way to the surface or sjut stragiht up fdloating designs would be more cost effective.

>>5822253
Underwater mining base. Robots. No deaths. Less resources needed to keep everything alive.

>>5822258
>I'm sure underwater communities will be a thing in the future, underwater hotels for example are too big of a deal to pass by.
[citation needed]

>>5822262
Why would you need a citation for that?
If noone else builds an underwater hotel I will, it's not like underwater living is impossible, it's just not cost effective. But rich people will pay good money for luxury.

Also pretty sure they are already designing those things down at dubai, you can ask for a citation for this, don't have it though.

>>5822270
>But rich people will pay good money for luxury
So underwater hotels are luxurious?

>>5822272
Well they can be if build so.
They are also exotic, you just need a good location for it, I would guess at least dubai will have some, maybe great barrier reef and at least couple of places in the karibeans would be prime locations.

>>5822277
If its and buts were sugar and nuts

>>5822280
k, i guess.

>>5822277
>>5822272

People pay ridiculous amounts of money to get stuffed in a tin can and shot into space, nothing particularly luxurious about the ISS either...

>>5822302
But to see another planet.. that would be exotic.

>>5822302
Yep. And when are able to make "luxury" up there the costs shoul dhave dropped absurdly.
>>5822304
We haven't gone past the moon. Tourism is in the bottom of the priority list kid.

>>5822260

Sounds like a plan. But you'd still need a decent support system for the machines on the surface. So floating city/mining barge thing is still an option. I wouldn't be against getting involved with something like that.

if you weren't in a coral reef or constantly blasting out massive lights you wouldn't see shit underwater

>>5822308
There are much more resources on nearby asteroids than you will ever find on the ocean. And it's probably more profitable to explore those too.

>>5822302
>>5822306

What I'm trying to say is that people pay ridiculous amounts of money to go to the ISS despite its creature comforts, because of the novelty.

We're at a point where for the same prices we can stick some pretty luxurious stuff into a submarine biome. So there's definitely a market for it.

Probably not a market anyone here will be able to take advantage of though.

>>5822314
I'd say it's so many people have the common wish to fly, so being weightless is just as fun.

>>5822311

Citation, fucking, needed.

>>5822318
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/401227.stm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_mining
Also there are some othe rnasa studies. And soem sagan books.

>>5822308
That's fine, they install those for oil and stuff.

Is this truly the level of /sci/ discourse these days? Half these posts are borderline illiterate.

>lol y wud u go thar?

Fuck you, why did we go to the moon? Why did the Spanish go to the Americas? Why do anything outside of your cave, Thog?

>is not economies lol

What kind of exploration is economical at first blush, you dense fuck?

>lets fix da problem on land b4 we wast $$ on science lol

Fuck off back to Facebook with your junior high pseudo-ideological half-baked platitudes, you triplenigger faggots.

>>5822345
If you value your infantile escapism fantasies higher than rationality, it's you who is wrong on /sci/. Science embraces reality and logic. "But muh feels" is not a valid argument. Please grow up. As an obvious underageb& you are not in the position to insult people who are actually studying or even doing science and math.

>>5822345
Fuck off back to Facebook with your junior high pseudo-ideological half-baked platitudes, you triplenigger faggots.

Fine, bud. What resources are underwater that we could use that we can't find on land?

>>5822356

Has there ever been a comprehensive geological study of the ocean floor? Oh whats that, most of the ocean floor isn't mapped at all?

Fuck, maybe we should go exploring.

>>5822345
You do realize that we are not talking about exploration but building cities underwater?

Those two are quite different things entirely.
I don't see how you could miss the point so far while simultaneulsy being so smug.

>>5821689
>english major
top lel

>>5822364
Exploring, sure. Why underwater living?

I suggested earlier to have a surface base to control underwater robots on the seabed for exploration and mining. That sort of thing is able to be mobile.

>>5822345
The sad thing is, people like the one you're referring to are the majority - they're the electorate, and they're the ones who vote people into office. Sadly, the prevalent zeitgeist of the day is anti-intellectualism, coupled with varying amounts of greed. Why do anything if it's not economically feasible? Why push the limits of human engineering and knowledge if some fat plutocratic fuck can't make a mint off of it? Yes, why indeed...

>>5822354
>supporting endeavors about science
>muh feels
I think you have me mixed up with someone else. Also I work in a scientific field and I got my degree before this was a board, so not underage.

Also, "robot AI will lead us to transhuman utopia!" Is escapism, "lets see what's over here, might be cool" is not.

>>5822356
If we knew what exactly was there, then we'd be able to confidently say we should/should not go.

We don't know. That's the point.

>>5822377
>anti-intellectualism
>implying that people are able to do anything that robots designed to explore underwater controlled by people can't
>it's more cost-effective to have robots trawl the ocean floor
>if it's dangerous we lose a robot, not lives

>>5822377
It's funny that you are using the word "anti-intellectualism". It accurately describes your person.

>>5822387
Hey now, no ad hominems. Attack his argument.

>it's not any less valid to have machines do the work

>>5822377

I don't think it's really greed to not want to bankrupt yourself doing something with few tangible benefits.

That's just called 'not being retarded.'

>>5822367
People are shitting on the entire idea. I say lets put out the runners and see where it leads us. Thread was started about colonization but that's not the exclusive direction the thread has taken.

Also, for intimate study, it is likely that temporary underwater "colonies" could make sense.

>>5822377
I actually think the public would vote and act rationally if they were presented with an unbiased and complete view of the information. Maybe with a skewed perception of what's "right", or maybe somewhat self-servingly, but overall I think most aren't complicit in their empowering the worst of humanity to guide us.

Alright, then we're in accord.

>city
bad idea, for now.

>robo-barge exploring the ocean floor
good idea.

As for that motherfucker who was saying we should go mine asteroids... You're going to have to get an entire ore processing rig, and support staff, and life support for the duration of the mission, out of earth orbit, as well as the logistics to bring the product back.

Good luck with that, sure you could get billions in precious metals, but it'd cost you billions to get the equipment and people there and back too, numbnuts. You greatly underestimate the cost of such an endeavour

It's all just cost-benefit. Cost to keep people alive and healthy while they deploy robots to explore from a stationary underwater base? High. Cost to keep people alive and healthy while they deploy robots to explore from a mobile above-water base? Less high. Still high. Less dangerous.

>>5822408

Isn't it more feasible to just use a boat and send small robots or subs down to explore occasionally? Building and maintaining a giant submarine probably will cost billions of dollars.

>>5822396
>waste trillions on force projection on sand niggers "spreading democracy" one warhead at a time
>muh wmds
>muh terr'izm
>foreign manipulation for an ally that wouldn't hesitate to shank us in the back if it suited them

Yeah, you're right, way better than "wasting" it on exploration or keeping it to be spent in domestic markets, yeah, keep fuckin' that chicken.

I'll see myself out, thanks.

>>>/pol/
>the day when /pol/ actually has better science discussion than /sci/
>you should be ashamed

>>5822383
>>5822387
>>5822396

I swear to god /sci/ is filled with underage retards who can't into reading comprehension.

Where did I state that making a moderate and expected profit was bad? Or using non-human labor? The fuck is wrong with you people? I'm lamenting the rise of borderline-retard populations that vote crooked, corporate-sponsored psychopaths into office, not the fact we'll come to rely on robots for our future manufacturing needs! Get your heads out of your asses and grow the fuck up.

Sure is summer is here.

>>5822423

I apologize for confusion. I meant a barge, to support robotic efforts. Shortened to robo-barge, but I can see how that might have been misinterpreted.

>>5822427
>>>/pol/
This may be more your style.

>>5822405
>People are shitting on the entire idea.
That becasue the idea is pretty retarded, there is practically no reason why average joe should live underwater

>I say lets put out the runners and see where it leads us
Whats the point of building cities underwater just for the lulz?

>Thread was started about colonization but that's not the exclusive direction the thread has taken.
Yeah it is, trolls like you just want to derail it. If you wanna talk about something else and insult people while you are at it go make a thread yourself, this one is about colonization and related things.

>temporary underwater "colonies" could make sense.
Research habitats are not proper colonies, and besided it's pretty much given that some permanen or semi permanent underwater living is going to happen, but that is not the same as clonizing oceans.

Next time read the thread before you go full retard, maybe it would help

>>5822427
Go back to >>>/pol/. There you can play with equally edgy teenagers.

self replicating robots that trawl the depths and cover the ocean floor with sensors so that we can measure things like oncoming earthquakes, what's up with the water, state of the ecosystem, what the rocks'n'junk look like, etc

>>5822408
That and those rare earth metals are only so valuable because...

>rare

Scarcity drop = price drop = way less economically beneficial for a private investor. This is some shit we'd need to undertake as a nation or group of nations, it's total financial suicide for a private group, even with the huge net benefit humanity would see.

>>5822443
I don't work in chemistry, but is it possible to synthesise rare earth metals?

>>5822450
>chemistry

No

>you will never explore the Earth

wtf?
why not?

>>5822438
>not supporting mass murder for corporate interests
>edgy
>look mom I said edgy again!
>inb4 look mom I used look mom again

I'd say craving muzzo-blood to power my neocrusades war machine is waaaay more edgy, but whatever.

>>5822433
>>5822438

Stop samefagging.

Money, aka funding is the sole driving factor behind what academia gets to play around with. Money also controls R&D, investment, and project scope. Guess who controls the money, friend. Protip: it sure ain't the people. So have fun getting any large, multi-faceted project off the ground without the blessing of either the government or one of the supranational megacorps.

But you'd know that if you still weren't wrestling with puberty and high school, you deluded, godforsaken liberal piece of excrement.

>>5822443

What makes the asteroids really useful is that they're positioned so that it would be easier to bring them into a useful orbit than the materials we have on the surface. So if we use them to build orbital structures the fuel costs are reduced. Though logistics still remain tricky.

>>5822450

Oh god, an alchemist, I thought we burnt all of these already.

>>5822450
wat

I'm not an alchemist I just wanted to know if it was possible to shift protons and electrons around sto that... hell, I don't know. I work with robots not tiny spinny dots

>>5822460
Are you fucking retarded? I am supporting your point, you illiterate moron.

>>5822464
What field? MechE?

>>5822464
it can be done but you need a nuclear reactor and a few billion dollars to make a kilo of whatever it is you want

>>5822464
"Possible"? Yes.

"Remotely practical on any scale beyond microscopic for now or the foreseeable future"? Fuuuuuuck no.

>>5822460
It wasn't samefagging, friend. All this ad hominem is entirely beside the point.

>death of a person
>destruction of a machine

>cost to maintain an underwater base
>cost to maintain a barge

>getting resources to a boat
>getting resources to an underwater base

>things that a person can do
>things that a robot designed to surpass human limitation controlled by a person can do

It's cheaper to send in robots. So would you say that it's more likely that robots would be used? Is that anti-intellectual?

>>5822464
That is NUCLEAR procedure not a CHEMICAL reaction

>>5822460
>liberal

If you feel the need to call someone a liberal in /sci/ then it's about the time to go back to /pol/
>>>/pol/

>>5822481
>>5822479
Oh good we posted within the same minute. Now he can calm his >>>/pol/ack titay

>>5822460
Right, so those that have best gamed the system to empower themselves and fatten their checkbook are the ones that control the direction of research and development, which shows little or no economic gain in the short term in almost all cases.

Anyone else see the problem here? Anybody?

>societal contribution is now completely divorced from wealth

Think that's it, quoting myself from another thread, but I think it's relevant.

>>5822483
There is a third to pol poster, that was my first pol in this thread.

It's clear that this shat up beyond repair. Time for me to abandon thread.

>>5822469
Haha, yeah. I'm sorry about that guys.

Was it really necessary to post that picture? I fucking hate that frog face.

>>5822478

>>5821604
Why

>>5822479
Only because you're too thick-headed to understand that progress is being halted by large corporations who have a stranglehold on our governments. The same governments that should be working for the interest of the people have been usurped from the inside, and now work for corporate interests instead. And why? Because we allow every idiot with a double-digit IQ to vote. Soccer moms get to decide whether we should halt or even ban research in genetic engineering. Doesn't that seem like a good idea to you?

We'll never have moon bases or underwater habitats or fusion or any of the other cool shit we could've had by now because most of our budget is being spent on unnecessary wars and social welfare. We pay imbeciles to breed and warmongering psychopaths to wage war. The system is broken.

Politics and science are inextricably linked, you doofus; one doesn't rule out the other. As someone who works in academia, this interests me, so fuck off with your edgy teen bullshit. Grow up, finish high school, get out of your moms' basement, earn a degree, and then come talk.

And fuck you for making me stray off topic.

>>5822493
>murica

top lel

>>5822493
>making me
Haha, aw. >>>/pol/

>>5822495
Our flag's on the moon, and our rover-dick is on Mars. What has your country done of late?

>>5822488
>le lizard faec

>>5822489
>knowing the difference between nuclear and chemical reactions is autism
I think religions might be more your thing than science.

>>5822495
>>5822498
>implying it's not all over the west
>implying it doesn't effect you
>even if you aren't western our faggotry WILL hinder your progress
>shh don't talk about it go to /pol/ where they'll just call you (and everyone else ever) a queer niggercuckjew JIDF stormfag zesbian xhe-male gender fluid trans-Asian who needs to check their privilege

>>5822498
You'd be surprised how many of my colleagues are /pol/iticians. And these are people who do postdoc work, not edgy teens shit-posting from their mom's basements.

Give it a few more years kid, you'll come around to our way of thought.

>>5822507
Knowing is not autismal, getting mad when some ignorant guy asks if it's possible, over what could be construed as semantics (nuclear chemistry is a thing) is autismal.

>/sci/ - Pedantry and Belittlement

>>5822493
You do realize that this has nothnig to do with science and you should take all that back to
>>>/pol/

We have /sci/ for science and /pol/ for politics.

Just leave the board and go back to /pol/

>>5822500
>implying it was a solo effort
Buttmad much?
And how about 'not failed in every single war they started'.

>>5822500
>Our flag's on the moon
You guys are still on about that?

>>5822507
>anyone who doesn't know the things I know is stupid

>>5822509
>WILL hinder your progress[citation needed]
Okay.

>>5822517
he doesn't know that the flag is probably white now.

>>5822509
>>>/pol/
We don't particularry care about all this. We are not implying anything else than the fact that you should go to /pol/

>>5822514
Don't try to understand him just rope him. Just rope him, throw and brand him.

>>5822521
you don't stain a white flag with shit, it's just rude.

>>5822518
Besides, I was just curious. It's not like I'm some uneducated or religious person, I just didn't learn about atomic science.

>>5822514
Science directly effects politics, politics directly effects science.

I feel the same way (begrudgingly, I'll admit) about religion threads on /pol/, for example, because religion plays a role in modern politics. I don't feel they're appropriate on /sci/, because the only way they effect science is through politics, or argumentium ad ignorantum or whatever the shit Latin is for "argument from ignorance" and/or argument from incredulity.

>>5822524
/sci/ is for science, if you wanna talk about politics go to /pol/
This thread is about underwater colonization, and it's technical and scientific details and all things related.

Your posts about soccer moms controlling the elections are /pol/

Learn the difference, it could save lives.

>>5822527
This.50% of our sciencists are wasting their time with the military. And they are directly influeced by politics.

>>5822527
It doesn't matter. Just becasue they are related doesn't mean you should /pol/ post here.
Pretty much everythnig is related to everythning doesn't mean I can start to shitpost whatever I want.

>>>/pol/

>>5822536
>50% of our sciencists
Citation. Also
>America

>>5822529
>Your posts about soccer moms controlling the elections are /pol/
They're not my posts.

>>5822537

>>5822514
It's got everything to do with science. Especially when you can't get grants because the liberal, queer-loving idiots above you in the hierarchy won't allow you to do research since it violates 'ethical principles', or some made-up horseshit. Why waste funding on biotech when we can give money to trans-gender research, right?

>>5822515
Other countries exist because we allow them to. Might makes right, friend. Remember that.

>>5822517
It's a monumental achievement - why shouldn't we be proud of it? I bet you're very proud of your own country, and whatever meager contributions it has made to science and tech.

>>5822518
>>/sci/ - Pedantry and Belittlement
/sci/ in a nutshell, yes. This board really has gone to shit. A pity, it used to be alright.


Welp, my break's over. Later, kids.

>>5822537
He needs to save face now, so expect more posts

>>5822537
I didn't turn the conversation political (nor am I OP, in case that was implied). Science relevant politics and politics relevant science are viable topics on both boards.

If there's a breakthrough next week that allows more efficient respiration, thus increasing human work capacity by xx%, is it not a relevant /fit/ and /sci/ topic?

If we discover a new animal species, is it not relevant to /an/ as well as /sci/?

>I don't like this so instead of hiding the thread I'm gonna piss and moan until the mods side with me!

Back to breaking bad and making loads a mone. I'm so cool.

>>5822544
>meager contributions
Newton, Faraday, Darwin, Francis Crick, Fleming.

>>>/pol/
Later, guy.

>>5822544
>Might makes right, friend.
10 years to find one guy hiding in a cave. The world is clearly at your mercy.

>>5822544
>A pity, it used to be alright.
>So I need to add to the problem

>>5822544
>the gays and transsexuals are stopping us from moon colonies

why are you people arguing with this guy

>>5822546
A quality /sci/pol/ post right above yours.
We clearly need these more.

You do realize that there is a difference with /pol/ shitposting and politics that are related to science, right?

Hint: If you have to use words like "liberal" "queer-loving" "idiots" you are probably looking at sihtposting.

Learn the difference it might save lives.

>>5822559
because they STARTED arguing with him.

>>5822564

>>5822557
Hey, I don't know about you, but I'm shaking in my boots. Did you know their scientists threw a firework at a rock once? It was a big rock!

>>5821604
>shitposting
>this board has really gone to shit

>>5822549
actually we're all here in the lab at uni. though I'm not the guy you're probably responding to, he went to grab a sandwich. you shouldn't be so hard on him he's a good guy even though he's got a short temper. he's just mad his grant didn't come through

>>5822566
how's life like at the "lab" care to describe?

>>5822567
shitty. hours are terrible and the money's ever worse but what can you do, right? it's not all bad though we do some pretty nifty stuff here :)

>>5822569
Damn that sounds interesting, what are you currently researching on there, or is it "sekrit".

>>5822560
We aren't the sane guy. I used none of those terms in this thread and only use them ironically otherwise.

>yes there are actually more than (1) persons who think differently than you, on this very board!
>why challenge their way of thinking? Better to just make a snarky comment and leave, then I win the Internet!
>jeez why is /sci/ going to shit? Better obnoxiously link other boards some more to help board culture!

>>5822573
I don't see why no one else could be.

Solar power on surface.
Nuclear power from seawater uranium.
Oil from offshore wells.

Of course humans could colonize the ocean. But why bother? It's just like the land, only more boring. Certainly, we will continue to exploit the ocean, but why live there? It's easily accessible to us while we still live on land.

In space, you can build superstructures in low gravity. You can have 24/7 sunlight. There are orders of magnitude more material resources than can be had on Earth. Most importantly, it is difficult and expensive to get there: to fully exploit it, you have to live out there. What we can do in space is pretty limited while we're living on Earth, compared to what we can do if we go out and live there.

There's no such requirement to live in the ocean to get the most out of the ocean.