The ocean offers us everything we want from space, and more.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957618]

We sent men into space in the hopes that one day we'd build outposts on other worlds, and find non-human intelligence. Several decades and hundreds of billions of dollars later, there's no base on the moon, no base on Mars, and we haven't even found a single species of alien microbe.

But our "Man in the Sea" program started around the same time the Apollo program did:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTLctPrqC3Q

Our Navy built three undersea military bases, and other nations collectively built hundreds. We found thousands of new species never seen by man up until that point, and we continue to find new species literally every time we venture to the sea floor. We met an unexpected non-human intelligence, dolphins, who we spent many years testing and found to be our cognitive equals. We trained them to assassinate Vietcong divers and they were so good at it, the Navy still has a Dolphin Soldier division for planting explosives, patrolling inlets and scouting for enemy subs.

Twice, men in special minisubs (the Trieste and the Alvin) have descended to the Challenger Deep, and lived to talk about it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-x9eok__Cw

Seven times we have been to the moon, but only twice have we been to the Challenger Deep. It proved deadlier, more exotic and in all ways more difficult to reach. We found strange, terrible creatures there, and have only sent robots since:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EMyymnC93E

To this day, we operate an undersea science base, the Aquarius. Other bases like Seabase 1 funded by governments and sponsors are either in the planning stages or under construction. Undersea resorts like the Poseidon cater to the wealthy, and more modest hotels like the Jules undersea lodge cater to the rest of us.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957621]

The sea floor is ripe for exploration, exploitation and colonization. Ex-NASA engineer Dennis Chamberland, funded by an assortment of scuba companies to which he licenses his technologies, has already built a habitat prototype which successfully operated for two weeks in the late nineties. Since then he's purchased a submarine, two support vessels and he's now partway through construction of the first two modules of his planned undersea colony: http://www.motherboard.tv/2010/3/10/the-aquatic-life-of-dennis-chamberland-one-man-s-quest-to-coloni
ze-the-sea

The ocean offers us everything we were promised by the space program, but which it has failed to deliver. New plant, microbe and animal species discovered weekly. An intelligent nonhuman species to interact with and learn from. Near endless resources in the form of biomass, rare earth minerals and condensed natural gases. civilian colonies, personal vessels, the stuff scifi wet dreams are made of. All possible (and being done) with today's technology.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957628]

This is a real fucking organism. It's alive, somehow. An example of the bizarre shit we find in the deep. Nothing remotely comparable has ever been found by astronauts and never will be in our lifetimes.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957631]

Another actual deep sea creature. What the fuck is it? How does it work? This is what you find when you explore inner space.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957637]

Scientists already live and work in the sea. Tourists have been doing it since the late 80s. And larger numbers will be staying in newer resorts very soon.

We stand at the dawn of a new age of exploration. Too young as a species to meaningfully explore space, we must first explore the equally exotic expanse below us.

[Anonymous No.1957640]

oh my god this is how exploration is supposed to go. Didnt you see the movie contact? its supposed to take forever and no one sees the point

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957641]

The shit we've found is beyond comprehension, and we've only fully explored about 3% of the ocean.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957644]

A new generation of vessels "flies" rather than floats, rolling and looping through the sea like dolphins and sharks.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957653]

Tourist subs have existed for twenty years. Personal subs have hit the market since then and can be had for the price of a supercar. Personal spaceships don't exist, and space tourism is just now getting started.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957664]

A gifted, experienced citizen has the means to colonize the sea. No one, as of yet, has the means to colonize the moon or mars. The barrier to sea floor colonization is lower as you succumb to the Earth's gravity well, rather than fighting it, to get to your destination.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957669]

A person of means can, today, purchase an undersea home. There's no orbiting home on the market for obvious reasons and there won't be for quite some time.

[Anonymous No.1957673]

>>1957618
except for aliens

Sorry, OP, while I concede that there are undiscovered and very weird organisms at the bottom of the ocean, it just doesn't compare to finding alien life; to make such a comparison you must ignore the massive implications that alien life would have such as a separate abiogenesis, totally different biology, we are not alone, suddenly humanity looks outward instead of constantly looking inward and bickering with each other like children.

I doubt anyone that has given these implications any thought at all would agree with you, and if they do they are deluding themselves.

Pic related, Ralph Pootawn disagrees also.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957677]

There's so much more waiting to be found. Life we ignore because it is not extraterrestrial. Why? We're bound to find life in the solar system eventually. Probably in the global ocean of Europa. And for that we'll need technology best developed exploring Earth's ocean.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957695]

>>1957673

>>....the massive implications that alien life would have such as a separate abiogenesis, totally different biology, we are not alone, suddenly humanity looks outward instead of constantly looking inward and bickering with each other like children.

Finding an alien microbe would not fundamentally change human nature. We would accept of ignore the implications at our own convenience. Christians would be divided between denying the authenticity of the find and insisting that their religion is compatible with aliens. Muslims would probably claim the Qur'an predicted the find in advance. Scientologists and Raelians would ve jizzing themselves as if the find completely vindicates their respective worldviews.

Nothing would change. We'd have gone billions of miles to find something any sensible biologist could've told you would be there. And it will probably be very much like the extremophile bacteria already found in our own ocean, around hydrothermal vents.

Besides which, as I pointed out, the technology needed to explore Europa's ocean is best developed in the exploration of our own.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957699]

Are these creatures not as beautiful and bizarre as any alien we could hope to find?

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957703]

Why are they somehow meaningless simply because they are not extraterrestrial?

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957712]

There's such beauty and knowledge in the deep, most of which remains unexplored. We spend many times more money shooting tin cans into space, only to find nothing.

[Anonymous No.1957713]

>>1957703
No-one is arguing aesthetics. Aliens could look completely retarded and it'd still be significant.

Space exploration "sucks", but the ocean creeps me the shit out.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957716]

And if we find an alien microbe, so what? We can't talk to it. It has little to teach us. It's not the benign, intelligent alien race we've been desperate to meet for centuries.

Dolphins are.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957725]

Tested with a variety of iconographic metrics, using waterproof touchscreens (pictured) delphinic IQ appears to range from 85 to the low 90s. They're descended from dogs and have a brain mass larger than ours, though it becomes roughly equal when glia is subtracted from the brain mass.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957737]

They use tools (sponges, sticks and other implements) they have a language (Which we've used to communicate with them) and they're innately altruistic, though they share our malign streak.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957749]

I'm not suggesting we cut space funding. If anything we should increase it. We maintain a vast fleet of essentially useless military vehicles built for conventional warfare of a sort unlikely to occur now that everyone's got the bomb, and scrapping most of that fleet would free up the funds needed to explore both space and the ocean with a renewed vigor not seen since the sixties.

[Anonymous No.1957753]

>>1957725
>They're descended from dogs
o.O

[Anonymous No.1957757]

>>1957737
fur surius? a languange?
source?

[Anonymous No.1957760]

>>1957753
whales are descendants from giraffes

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957769]

>>1957753
>>o.O

Yup, all cetaceans are a descendant of a canid ancestor. Pic related.

It may to some degree explain their affinity for us.

[Anonymous No.1957777]

>>1957760
which would explain their long necks.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957792]

>>1957757
http://www.dolphin-institute.org/resource_guide/animal_language.htm

They have their own, but most instances where we've had complex conversations has been using a language we invented and taught them. They modified it on the fly, slightly changing words we came up with for reasons we don't understand, perhaps they're easier to pronounce that way.

Their natural language in the wild appears to involve sending picture information to one another via sonar. They can reproduce echolocation images of places, objects and other dolphins, and broadcast that image towards another dolphin, who interprets in the same way they would the legitimate echo image from that place/object/dolphin.

Our way of communicating must seem very blunt and strange to them.

[Anonymous No.1957798]

>>1957769
lol no
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurasiatheria

[Anonymous No.1957801]

>>1957757
I'm also curious about this.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957811]

>>1957798

I stand corrected. So this thing in the picture (the ancestor of modern cetaceans) isn't a canid. My bad. Whatever it is, it looks an awful lot like a dog.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957824]

>>1957801

>>I'm also curious about this.

See: >>1957792

Pic related: How they talk.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957844]

"Studying the Big Brained Dolphin"

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/21/science/21conversation.html?_r=1&ref=science

[Anonymous No.1957852]

>>1957716
>And if we find an alien microbe, so what? We can't talk to it. It has little to teach us.

Yeah... as seeing what other paths abiogenesis can result to is not important knoweledge gained.

[Anonymous No.1957866]

>>1957753
>>1957760
wtf am I reading...

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957879]

>>1957852

>>Yeah... as seeing what other paths abiogenesis can result to is not important knoweledge gained.

But we won't. We'll see just the beginning of an alternate path. A primitive, simple microbe, almost certainly very similar to ones on Earth. In order to replicate and evolve it will need DNA or something so like it as to be essentially identical. And because all material in the solar system originated from the same stellar disc, it will almost certainly be similar to Earth microbes in chemical composition and definitely carbon based.

[Anonymous No.1957890]

>>1957866
it's not that hard to grasp..
they breath air, not water

[Anonymous No.1957899]

>>1957879
>But we won't. We'll see just the beginning of an alternate path. A primitive, simple microbe, almost certainly very similar to ones on Earth.

probably not

the Last Universal Common Ancestor of all present organisms on earth was already quite and advanced product of evolution and we can only wildly hypothesize what the transitional steps, from lifeless organic matter to prokaryotes, are.

the fact that we do not hope to replicate abiogenesis in the near future should have made that obvious

[Anonymous No.1957917]

We have found alien microbes, on Mars.

Sea exploration is alot more important right now, think of all the jobs, think of all the new discoveries, maybe even a cure for cancer and/or aids.

If we colonize the ocean then we wouldn't be facing overpopulation at such a fast rate as today.

Also, Global Warming would be alot smaller of a threat.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957943]

>>1957899

>>the fact that we do not hope to replicate abiogenesis in the near future should have made that obvious

And we won't be sending men anywhere beyond low Earth orbit until 2015 at the soonest, with the Mars mission now scheduled to begin by 2030.

Exploration of the ocean offers all the same benefits of space exploration and to a greater extent, except for the promise of alien life. And Space exploration hasn't delivered on it yet.

We can go to the ocean *today*, and do the kinds of things there that we won't be able to do in space for centuries.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957956]

>>1957917

>>If we colonize the ocean then we wouldn't be facing overpopulation at such a fast rate as today.

As much as I'm pro-colonization of the sea, it won't be for most people. It makes more financial sense to put those displaced by coastal flooding up in "seasteads": Oceanic surface communities built using the same methods as current oil rigs.

The only people who will live and work undersea will be those who have to be there in order to do their jobs. Scientists, soldiers, miners and farmers, almost exclusively.

Pictured: a seastead.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957971]

For fuck's sake look at this thing. It has a transparent skull, and eyeballs that can elevate up into position, allowing it to look ahead or straight up at will.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1957996]

This isn't retouched. It actually does this.

[Anonymous No.1958013]

What jobs and classes have their focus on underwater technology?

I'm very interested in this now. Underwater cities and such sound amazing and much more eventful than space-based fields at this point in time.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958014]

Naturally bioluminescent, in a variety of colors, with some species capable of displaying moving images across their skin as if it were a computer screen.

But spacefags don't care, because it's not their Navi waifu.

[Anonymous No.1958017]

>>1957917
>We have found alien microbes, on Mars.
>we have assumed the existance of microbes on Mars to rationalize some measurments on its atmospheric composition that did not fit our initial predictions
fix'd

[Anonymous No.1958034]

>>1958014
>implying any educated exobiologist/astronomer expects aliens to be fuckable
alternatively:
>implying all educated exobiologists/astronomers are women or engineers wearing japanese schoolgirl uniform

[Anonymous No.1958035]

I am all for exploring the depths. The technology developed to work in high-pressure environment can be integrated into space exploration.

>We sent men into space in the hopes that one day we'd build outposts on other worlds, and find non-human intelligence.

No OP, despite what Star Trek tells you we are trying to figure out a way, how to mine the fuck out of it. Now I agree, the sea is full of resources, but they aren't infinite.

Also - the cosmos provides larger area for real estate.

That being said; MOAR PICS!!!!!!

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958039]

>>1958013

>>What jobs and classes have their focus on underwater technology?

Actually, much as I hate it, all the money right now is in ROV development. I'd rather see manned exploration and colonization, but the focus is all on undersea robots.

>>I'm very interested in this now. Underwater cities and such sound amazing and much more eventful than space-based fields at this point in time.

It's a less popular vision for the future, but it's the one that seems to be within our grasp, and close to coming true.

Mostly because there's great wealth of all kinds in the sea, and robotics has become sophisticated enough that we can harvest that wealth without the challenges associated with sustaining the lives of human laborers on the ocean floor for extended periods.

Disappointing for guys like me, but then if there's work undersea, people will move there. Perhaps in colonies like Dennis Chamberland's "Aquatica". When he sinks the first two modules in 2012 we may be watching a new chapter of history unfold.

[Anonymous No.1958046]

>>1957621
>>1957628
>>1957631
>>1957637
>>1957653
>>1957664
>>1957669
>>1957695
>>1957699
>>1957703
>>1957712

oh wait...

you are the hampture guy?

how is the project going?

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958052]

More deep sea wonders coming...

[Anonymous No.1958057]

>>1958052
submerging my dick to saltwater

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958060]

>>1958046

I have two additional rooms, and the transparent acrylic tubes to join them are in the mail. One room will contain an exercise wheel/saucer thingie that will generate a small amount of power for lighting and heating, mostly as proof of concept. The other room will grow clover as a backup food source. I won't be relying on it for air as that would overcomplicate things.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958070]

The deep sea might be creepy to some, terrifying to others, but isn't that part of it's appeal?

[Anonymous No.1958073]

>>1958017

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1572233/Mars-rover-finds-signs-of-microbial-life.html

[Anonymous No.1958076]

>post awesome pics
>no wiki links

ffuuuu OP

[Anonymous No.1958092]

Space is farther away. Space is harder to explore. I'd be way more interested in this if these were critters on Europa. Microbes elsewhere in outerspace is pretty much a given at this point, but being able to hold up a petri dish with gunk on it and say "These microbes were brought back from Enceladus." would carry much greater weight than cool looking freeform organisms from deep in earth's own ocean.

[Anonymous No.1958093]

FUCK THE OCEAN

WE SHOULD BE EXPLORING ALTERNATE UNIVERSES

THEN WE MEET A MUCH MORE ADVANCED VERSION OF OURSELVES, AND THEY CONQUER US WITH THEIR SUPERIOR TECHNOLOGY

[Anonymous No.1958101]

>>1958039
What about jobs/fields that'll likely net you a lab/home underwater? You said scientist, but what field?

Just plain ol' Marine Biology? Because that sadly doesn't interest me nor seem very profitable. Though, the idea of educating and teaching dolphins interests me, especially if pays decently.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958104]

>>1958076

I'm here to provoke a fascination with the deep. Perhaps you're now motivated to begin binging on available data? :3

Unlike space, the sea is open to the individual. It's difficult, but within one man's means to build a very capable minisub. Many have done so, there are even annual races. They have assisted in exploring sunk wrecks and likely foreshadow the sorts of vehicles which will carry workers and scientists between colonies someday soon.

This isn't something only governments and corporations can do. The sea is a frontier open to the individual, and all the information we have about it is already at your fingertips.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958110]

>>1958101

>>What about jobs/fields that'll likely net you a lab/home underwater? You said scientist, but what field?

Biology, geology, farming, dolphins. The first three because there are valuable species which can only be cultivated or studied at-depth. The last one because they are militarily valuable and will become increasingly so as we begin to exploit the ocean.

[Anonymous No.1958118]

>>1958070
WTF is this? a trilobite?

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958122]

I should add mining as well, but that's likely to be a dangerous and unrewarding job. The only places you'd need humans to mine are where conditions prevent the use of robots and where the shore is too far away to house workers on land. China is more likely to do this than anyone else at the moment.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958125]

I should add mining as well, but that's likely to be a dangerous and unrewarding job. The only places you'd need humans to mine are where conditions prevent the use of tethered robots and where the shore is too far away to house workers on land. China is more likely to do this than anyone else at the moment.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958146]

I'd like to see more deep sea themed sci fi on TV, too. I miss Sea Quest. We need something like Battlestar Galactica, but underwater.

[Anonymous No.1958148]

>>1958110
Do you think that dolphins could succesfully practice objectivism? There are some individual dolphins that would qualify as sex offenders.

http://scienceray.com/biology/marine-biology/not-so-cute-dolphin-gang-rape/

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958153]

I look at shit like this and I can't comprehend why we aren't building more science outposts, deeper, and in rich locations like the great barrier reef for instance.

[Anonymous No.1958160]

>>1958118
Nope. Trilobytes are all extinct.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958163]

>>1958148

Haha, fuck. Probably. I wonder if communication between our species will ever become clear enough that missionaries for various ideologies would begin trying to convert dolphins.

[Anonymous No.1958171]

>>1958148
Dolphins are not people. The don't have morality. They are animals. The ocean is cold and dark with prohibitively high pressures. OP is gay.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958193]

>>1958171

>>Dolphins are not people.

"Scientists say dolphins should be treated as 'non-human persons" http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/article6973994.ece

>>The don't have morality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism_in_animals#Examples_of_animal_altruism

>>They are animals.

So are we.

>>The ocean is cold and dark with prohibitively high pressures.

Precisely, it's a great challenge. Since when did "This seems difficult" become a reason *not* to attempt something?

>>OP is gay.

Gay for science, and for the ocean. :3

[Anonymous No.1958197]

>>1958104 I'm here to provoke a fascination with the deep.
WE ALREADY DO. BUT GUESS WHAT. SPACE INVOKES AN EVEN GREATER FASCINATION. DUR HUR

[Anonymous No.1958199]

Yea, let's start some more wars in the science world!!! I hope the spaceport and all the space hotels that are about to pop up shit on your parade.

[Anonymous No.1958208]

OK, OP just fuckin tell me now... How do these underwater creatures create their own light? and how can we mimick something akin to this?

[Anonymous No.1958209]

>>1958193
>COMPLETELY RETARDED scientists say dolphins should be treated as 'non-human persons"
FTFY

>>The don't have morality.
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism_in_animals#Examples_of_animal_altruism
Bullshit. Instinctive behaviors are different from morality. Morality is the ability to rise above instinct and act contrary to it via reason. Only humans have it. (Not that all humans use it.)

>>They are animals.
>So are we.
But they are only animals. We are not. See above.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958219]

>>1958197

>>SPACE INVOKES AN EVEN GREATER FASCINATION. DUR HUR

You sound mad. Pic related.

[Comrade Minskov No.1958223]

>>1958163
Communist dolphins are superior true Soviets.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958228]

>>1958209

>> Instinctive behaviors are different from morality. Morality is the ability to rise above instinct and act contrary to it via reason.

We hunt them for meat, yet they regularly save our asses. That is a perfect example of rising above instinct, and acting contrary to reason.

[Anonymous No.1958229]

>>1958209
yeah

draw a line wherever it fits your opinion

[Anonymous No.1958236]

This whole thread is dildos. Both the exploration of the oceans and space exploration are needed for advancement.

Two ice cream cones and nobody will share.

[Anonymous No.1958240]

>>1958209
>Bullshit. Instinctive behaviors are different from morality. Morality is the ability to rise above instinct and act contrary to it via reason. Only humans have it. (Not that all humans use it.)
yeah morality is metaphysic and only humans were farted on the face by God to have it

GTFO, please

[Anonymous No.1958248]

>>1958209

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958251]

>>1958236

>> Both the exploration of the oceans and space exploration are needed for advancement.

Agreed. Space is a longer term investment with a more distant payoff. That's the only real difference. I'm saying oceanic exploration and colonization offers the same benefits, to a larger degree, and the payoff is more immediate.

We should do both, but oceanic science is criminally under-funded, even compared to space.

[Anonymous No.1958254]

>>1958251
We ARE doing both if you haven't noticed. I really don't understand the point of this discussion.

[Anonymous No.1958262]

>>1958254
to much $$ to NASA for doing practically nothing?

[Anonymous No.1958269]

>>1958262
You don't know your shit do you?

[Anonymous No.1958270]

sure is Rapture in here

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958273]

>>1958254

>>We ARE doing both if you haven't noticed. I really don't understand the point of this discussion.

The point of the discussion is this. Look at the picture at left. It's the International Space Station.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958281]

....And here is our only undersea laboratory, Aquarius.

[Anonymous No.1958283]

>>1958269
no

do you?

[Anonymous No.1958291]

>>1958273
>It's the International Space Sta...
BO-O-O-O-O-O-ORIIIING

[Anonymous No.1958302]

>>1958273
Who gives a fuck, if you had payed attention you'd of noticed that there are groups working on making a viable colony underwater. There is a analog of just about everything space does in the oceans! In space we look at the universe, in the ocean we look at the ocean.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958309]

The Aquarius has been monitoring the coral reefs, hurricanes and more recently the oil spill. It's currently working on methods of artificially restoring coral health in spite of increasing oceanic acidification. Data collected by aquanauts aboard Aquarius was used to establish the effect of leaked oil on the reefs, which is surprisingly minimal. It's been able to monitor the passage of hurricanes overhead and their effect on ocean fauna. NASA even uses the base to train for missions, as coordinating workers on the sea floor poses most of the same challenges as coordinating the same labor on the lunar or Martian surface. The successor is even planned to be modular, specifically because it will give astronauts hands on practice assembling a modular habitat under low gravity conditions where return to safety is not an option.

[Anonymous No.1958311]

>>1958160
creationists have used this little fella (serolid) to argue against evolution.

they say trilobites are still alive.

[Anonymous No.1958329]

>>1958311
That seems silly. If they're going to spread the bullshit, there are isopods of more appropriate size to pass off as trilobites.

[Anonymous No.1958337]

>>1958329
I love isopods

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958339]

Undersea science habitats eventually run out of things to study in their vicinity. But then, a space station in low earth orbit has a much more limited area of knowledge to explore. We've been doing the same basic low grav experiments aboard the ISS since the first module came online. Busywork, to make it appear worth the investment.

Compare that to the Aquarius, which has been moved three times so far to study different ecosystems and environments. Reefs, vents, kelp beds, seagrass 'meadows', the ocean floor is a diverse place and a seafloor science base can be moved around to explore all of it.

And that's all at a drastically lower price. A price that has come down considerably in the past few decades mainly due to advances in materials like acrylic, silicone, kevlar, carbon fiber, etc. and affordable compact aircon, dehumidifiers and CO2 removers. Because of this, other nations have begun to get in on the act, sinking their own ocean labs.

Pictured; Italy's answer to Aquarius.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958367]

More incomprehensible deep sea creatures...

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958376]

Dolphins being total bros....

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958381]

Nightmare fuel...

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958388]

Jacque Cousteau maxin' and relaxin'.

[Anonymous No.1958391]

OP forgets the DANGERS of such exploration.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958393]

High speed military minisubs....

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958400]

>>1958391

Without a frontier to conquer, we've become fat, lazy and complacent. It's about time we had some dangers to struggle with.

[Anonymous No.1958408]

>>1958311
so discovering a relict-species of a group thought extinct disproves evolution?

what part of their logic did I miss?

[Anonymous No.1958413]

>>1958408
That's what I thought too, they already have good Coelacanth right?

You know how these creationists are.

[Anonymous No.1958436]

>>1958413
my face when creationists with their quest to find more cryptic species / lazarus taxa to disprove evolution further strengthen our understanding of it

[Anonymous No.1958439]

>>1958236
X2 Too much hating.

[Anonymous No.1958444]

>>1958436
>mfw Mokele-mbembe

[Anonymous No.1958460]

>>Twice, men in special minisubs (the Trieste and the Alvin) have descended to the Challenger Deep, and lived to talk about it:

Wrong, we've only done it once. The Trieste was the only manned descent to challenger deep.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Challenger_Deep

And even then there have only been two robotic descents to Challenger Deep. Which is a shame really, because according to some offhand calculations I made, it should be possible for just about anyone to build a robot to go to Challenger Deep, so long as the bot is completely autonomous. One of the most expensive parts of robots that have been sent down to Challenger Deep is the extremely long fiber optic cable necessary for communication. This is not needed for an autonomous robot.

As far as protecting electronics from the intense pressure goes, it's pretty simple put them in a container of hydraulic oil(allows one to use thinner walls made of cheaper material) and make sure everything's solid state. Protecting a camera to take pictures is another story as one needs to keep the camera in air(or extensively redesign the camera), this necessitates a window made of sapphire.

The only other issue is that makes this hard for just about anyone to do is obtaining a suitable ship to take the robot out to sea and to retrieve it.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958462]

I was pretty surprised to discover it's possible to find the Aquarius undersea lab in Google Earth. Pic related.

[Anonymous No.1958482]

>>1958460

I'm interested, how expensive was this robot you speak of?

[Anonymous No.1958491]

>>1958460
You just threw OP's world upside down.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958509]

>>1958491

Not really, I knew about this. There's a great deal robots still can't do, especially without a tether. There will be a role for humans to play in the deep for some time yet.

[Anonymous No.1958518]

>>1958509
>There's a great deal robots still can't do, especially without a tether
can't be waifus ;_;

[Anonymous No.1958573]

>>1958509
You knew man had only been to the Challenger Deep once, yet you stated twice?

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958578]

>>1958573

No, I thought you were talking about the robot thing. I was wrong about the Alvin voyage to the Challenger Deep, that's scheduled but hasn't happened yet.

[Anonymous No.1958587]

>>1958482

I am still waiting for the numbers....

[Anonymous No.1958595]

>>1958578
newfag to this part of 4chan and very interested
how deep is challenger deep?

[Anonymous No.1958597]

>>1958595
it's so deep that's a challenge to get there

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958600]

>>1958595

>>how deep is challenger deep?

6.8 miles. You know when you're in a passenger jet at cruising altitude? And how far down the surface is? If you were at the surface of the ocean, the Challenger Deep would be slightly further below you than that.

[Anonymous No.1958606]

>>1958600
thanks
bumping for more

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958614]

Fuckin' deep sea monsters

[Anonymous No.1958617]

Hey OP, what is this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Challenger_Deep#Possible_nuclear_waste_disposal_site

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958618]

This was the first undersea habitat ever. Not much to look at, but it was the first step on a longer journey.

[Anonymous No.1958622]

>>1958600
METRIC MOTHERFUCKER!

DO YOU SPEAK IT?!

[Anonymous No.1958623]

So this American guy and this Swiss guy dive 1.9 leagues under the sea...

[Anonymous No.1958627]

>>1958617
inb4: local fauna mutates into eldritch lovecraftian nightmares (not a significant change btw)

[Anonymous No.1958628]

>>1958623
link video?

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958629]

>>1958617

Challenger Deep is nearly lifeless. The most interesting thing about it was the deep, ancient "ooze" on the floor. All that remained of every organism ever to die and sink into the trench. We've got plenty of samples of that shit though.

Once we've sent a few more expeditions down there, sure, dump nuclear waste in there.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958635]

>>1958622

My bad. It's almost exactly 11 kilometers deep.

[Anonymous No.1958636]

>>1958622
Metric is for poor people and niggers, you filthy plebeian.

[Anonymous No.1958641]

>>1958636
>implying niggers in Europe

[Anonymous No.1958647]

>>1958641
>Africa
>metric

Sure is angry commoners, jews, and sandniggers in here.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958669]

Here's Seabase 1. Designed to accommodate 25 divers, scientists and tourists.

www.seabase1.org

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEWwDsHXG9I

[Anonymous No.1958675]

>>1957618
Underwater bases are a bad idea. Haven't you seen deep blue sea?

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1958677]

>>1958675

>>Haven't you seen deep blue sea?

It may surprise you to learn that the film you speak of was not a documentary.

[Anonymous No.1958691]

enough scary shit crawls out of the sea, I don't think we need to go prodding any deeper

I can't imagine what shit looks like, when its evolved to live in a cold, high pressure, lightless environment

I rather look at the surface of other planets, probably filled with all sorts of cute fuzzy things

[Anonymous No.1958696]

>>1958675
I just remember the part where the chick was taking off her wetsuit. Did something else happen in the movie?

[Anonymous No.1958722]

>>1958482
The robot in pic related is $8 million dollars. The robot I'm proposing could probably be built for $5000 or maybe even less, I haven't done the exact cost analysis. It might even be possible to bring the cost under $1000 if one took the "hobo build" approach and went with basic functionality. IE, low maneuverability, low bottom time(heck the trieste only spent 20 minutes down there), just take pictures, low speed. It wouldn't accomplish much, but it'd give you bragging rights for the 4th descent of Challenger Deep. Alternatively one could send a whole bunch of cheap robots down and collect more data then one could with a big expensive one.

[Anonymous No.1958736]

>>1958691
They glow most of the time in pretty lights. Not scary at all.

[Anonymous No.1958738]

>>1958722

Obviously you'll never survive in academia, only a loon would propose such a modest budget, your peers will discredit you and bar you from further research

A typical rule of thumb is any research grant involving rudimentary robots is at LEAST 5 million dollars. If the robots actually have to do shit, then we're talking double digits.

[Anonymous No.1958791]

>>1958722

A 5 grand robot capable of moving, surviving high pressure and taking pictures? I would be thrilled to see what your schematics are.

[Anonymous No.1958844]

>>1958738

I find the idea interesting. Not everything has to be a over-the-top-highest-of-the-highest-tech-possible venture. If you can do a crappy job for 5k $, but still do it. Why not try?

[Anonymous No.1958851]

>>1958738
>>1958738
$5 million dollars? WHERE DO YOU GET THAT KIND OF MONEY! WHERE DO I GET THAT KIND OF MONEY! Is that typical? I mean here at Buttfuck University(located in Buttfuck near Middle of Nowhere) it's rare for anyone to get a million dollar grant much less anything close. We regularly make robots capable of flying inside buildings, climbing up walls, cleaning out nuclear reactors, and locating persons of interest in crowds and chasing them down. All autonomously too. NONE of our robots have cost more than $10,000 to make. Design and testing on the other hand are a bit more expensive.

Also what's rudimentary?

[Anonymous No.1958909]

>>1958791
>>moving
vertically more so than horizontally.

As far as electronics go it would need motor drivers for brushless motors(with the coils on the inside and magnets on the outside), an acoustic status transmitter, a microcontroller(arduino for the blog cred), a ballast release actuator driver, LED lights, a camera, a sonar unit(to sense the bottom and maintain a certain distance from the bottom), a GPS and satellite phone(for relaying its location for retrieval after completing the mission).

[Xenos No.1958976]

One of my professors for a marine bio class at my university was on Alvin. She passed around one of these cups that they put outside at depth.

Later I worked down at Woodshole with another lab and ship. Out on the docks I saw them renovating Alvin. They had it all taken apart.

[Anonymous No.1958995]

>>1958909

Hmmm....

Hmmmm....

I should write this down. If I ever have the time to go into robotics I may look it up.

[Anonymous No.1959045]

Reasons why underwater sucks

It's wet
You get the bends

[Anonymous No.1959050]

>>1959045

You don't get the bends if you decompress like you're supposed to.

And space has downsides too. Namely micrometeorites causing a hull puncture, followed by explosive decompression. So like the sea but worse.

[Anonymous No.1959060]

>>1959050

Space is big though. The ocean is just a tiny droplet of water clinging to the surface of a rock. It cannot offer us the permanent home that the stars can.

[Anonymous No.1959064]

More valuable resources under the ocean than there is on land. Why wouldn't you want to go down there and claim the trillion trillion dollar resources?

[Anonymous No.1959065]

>>1959060

>>Space is big though.

It's also empty. The places we can actually colonize right now (the moon and mars) are much smaller than the Earth in terms of surface area and probably equivalent to the surface area of the ocean floor.

>>The ocean is just a tiny droplet of water clinging to the surface of a rock.

See above.

>>It cannot offer us the permanent home that the stars can.

If mankind can live in space, he can live in the sea.

[Anonymous No.1959066]

>>1959060
We can live on stars now? wat

[Anonymous No.1959074]

>>1959064

>>Why wouldn't you want to go down there and claim the trillion trillion dollar resources?

Because up until a few weeks ago, China would mine them and ship them to us for less than it would cost to mine them ourselves.

But recently, they cut us off: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/19/business/global/19mineral.html

Speculation is that they intend to lead the world in clean energy technologies like electric vehicles, solar panels and wind turbines. All of which use rare earth metals, which are plentiful and easy to get at (often fully exposed veins) on the sea floor.

Predictably, they're also trying to get the lead in deep sea mining: http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/08/29/135221/China-Plans-To-Mine-the-Yellow-Sea-Floor?from=rss

Why? Well, because that's probably where we'll start mining for the minerals they'll no longer sell us. And they want an edge in deep sea mining, presumably so they can sell us the equipment.

Always ten fuckin' steps ahead of the game.

[Anonymous No.1959077]

>>1959074
Like the chinks can ever beat us at tech when we get fucking serious...

[Anonymous No.1959083]

>>1959077

They have more shaolin monks than we have bullets. You do the math.

[Anonymous No.1959089]

>>1959065

>If mankind can live in space, he can live in the sea.

How many people? Then what?

Why does this sound like Seaquest DSV?

[Anonymous No.1959091]

>>1959077

Like the chinks can ever beat us at tech when we get fucking serious...

What are we gonna build electric motors out of? What about batteries? Both require rare minerals like Neodymium and Manganese that China has a stranglehold on. Largely because they've been quietly working on seafloor mining robots for some time now.

They caught us with our pants down. You might say they pee-pee'd in the entire world's coke. From here on out it's a game of catch-up.

[Anonymous No.1959094]

>>1959077

>>Like the chinks can ever beat us at tech when we get fucking serious...

What are we gonna build electric motors out of? What about batteries? Both require rare minerals like Neodymium and Manganese that China has a stranglehold on. Largely because they've been quietly working on seafloor mining robots for some time now.

They caught us with our pants down. You might say they pee-pee'd in the entire world's coke. From here on out it's a game of catch-up.

[Anonymous No.1959096]

Asteroid hits earth. Oceans get boiled.

Humanity is over.

Thanks a lot. No matter what you may say about the hospitality of the ocean, as long as you care about the survival of the human species, you cannot get over the fact that putting all our eggs in this one basket, wet or not, is risky and potentially suicidal.

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.1959101]

Well Mr. Mad Scientist, what happens when Mars gets oceans?

[Anonymous No.1959110]

>>1959096

>>Asteroid hits earth. Oceans get boiled. Humanity is over.

That's the only one, though. Humanity is also "over" in the event of nuclear war, or a mass plague, etc. etc. which we could survive in seafloor colonies. The asteroid scenario is the only one where you'd need colonies on the moon or mars.

>>Thanks a lot. No matter what you may say about the hospitality of the ocean, as long as you care about the survival of the human species, you cannot get over the fact that putting all our eggs in this one basket, wet or not, is risky and potentially suicidal.

And I'm not saying we should. I am ALL FOR colonies on other worlds. But right now, there's a gap in funding that's atrocious. Seven trips to the moon, and only one to the challenger deep. A space station ten times larger than our undersea station. It's ludicrous.

The asteroid thing is literally the only argument for space. There's more immediately available wealth in the ocean, a ready supply of food, electricity and fuel, it's cheaper to get to, seafloor science bases can be moved from site to site, etc. etc. etc.

We should invest in both equally. Mainly because we'll need the wealth of the ocean to sustain serious expansion into space.

[Anonymous No.1959123]

>>1959110
>>1959110

>Humanity is also "over" in the event of nuclear war, or a mass plague, etc. etc. which we could survive in seafloor colonies.

Uh... plague in a contained environment would be quite bad. And you're really supposing that this underwater society would not be aligned with any nation nor would the underwater civilizations ever attack one another for resources? Nukes work underwater you know.

It's...like you're from the 70's or something.

>The asteroid thing is literally the only argument for space

It won't run out of room being the second. Seriously, what's this Rapture of yours to do? Just start pushing people out of airlocks when everything eventually becomes overcrowded?

[Anonymous No.1959127]

>>1959110

If humans start to populate the oceans. Won't it have a similar effect to the wildlife there that our encroachment into forests has? Not to mention all the pollution that you won't have any ways around technologically speaking for generations.

[Anonymous No.1959132]

>>1959110

>Space ship
>has to survive anywhere between 0 and 1 atmospheres

>Deep sea ship
>has to survive anywhere between 1 and 1000+ atmospheres.

>the sea is easier than space

Don't think so tim

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959134]

>>1959127

>>If humans start to populate the oceans. Won't it have a similar effect to the wildlife there that our encroachment into forests has?

The opposite, actually. Coral loves to grow on metal structures which is why we sink decommissioned ships to act as artificial reefs.

>>Not to mention all the pollution that you won't have any ways around technologically speaking for generations.

All undersea vehicles are electric, whether it's batteries, fuel cells or nuclear. They are zero emissions. Any permanent undersea installation would get it's power from solar, wind, tidal and hydrothermal. They are, by necessity, very clean.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959137]

>>1959132

>>Don't think so tim

Space ship: Has to fight Earth's gravity well and dedicate 90% of it's mass to fuel. Must carry all of it's own water, air and food. Incredibly expensive per-pound cost just to get into orbit.

Deep sea vessel: Needs only succumb to Earth's gravity well, and surfacing is as easy as blowing the ballast tanks. Can easily be nuclear powered with present day technology. Filters oxygen from sea water and scrubs CO2, can stay underwater for years if need be. Can desalinate seawater for drinking, and harvest sea life for food.

[Anonymous No.1959144]

>>1959134

Well you say it's full of food. We won't fish for food? we won't make some sort of farming establishments? You're talking about feeding billions of people, clothing them and giving them all something to do in cramped and leaky little compartments. You said they'd survive nuclear war so they wouldn't be shallow, near coral would they?

>All undersea vehicles are electric

Well good for the vehicles. What about the people? What happens to all their bodily waste? or the trash they produce? What about luxuries? Will the colony be self-sufficient or will it have to depend on the surface for factory made goods?

One more good thing about space. If the hull fails, you get time to do something about it. Not so at 40,000 fathoms.

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.1959147]

>>1959137
...Touche.

[Anonymous No.1959156]

>>1959137
>Filters oxygen from sea water and scrubs CO2
If you bring plants and have a light source, not even this is needed.
You can even make a complete ecosystem, provided you have enough energy.

[Anonymous No.1959158]

>>1959137

I'm sorry, it's just such a short-term patch on the problems facing humanity. It's not a solution it's a panacea.

[Anonymous No.1959159]

>>1959156

and you can do this on a space ship just as easily.

[Anonymous No.1959162]

>>1959158
The only REAL solution is birth control, period.

[Anonymous No.1959178]

>>1959162

None of the solutions are acceptable by the cultures on earth. Find ones that are.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959179]

>>1959158

>>I'm sorry, it's just such a short-term patch on the problems facing humanity.

Naturally. I am promoting it as a transitional step.

>>It's not a solution it's a panacea.

I don't think you know what that word means.

[Anonymous No.1959204]

>>1959178
>None of the solutions are acceptable by the cultures on earth. Find ones that are.

If the so-called "cultures" in Earth doesn't want humanity implements some birth control policy, Nature implements her.

With a big difference - Nature is much more harsh and cruel than any human being.

[Anonymous No.1959224]

>The only REAL solution is birth control, period.
>None of the solutions are acceptable by the cultures on earth. Find ones that are.
>on earth

anyone think of half-life 2, or just me?

[Anonymous No.1959227]

>>1959204

And what would that be? People dying? People die all the time it's not going to change religious beliefs.

They'll be "the unworthy"

[Anonymous No.1959246]

>>1959224
Yeah, was too

[Anonymous No.1959293]

>>1959227
Nature's solution: LOTS AND LOTS of people die and the survivors have a shitty life.

It's not like "friend's brother died in a car accident", it's more like "2 or 3 or MY siblings died because there's no food and I'm starving until go with them".

[Anonymous No.1959298]

>>1959246
>>1959224

Never played HL2, care to explain the reference?
(I'm samefag as >>1959162 )

[Anonymous No.1959299]

>>1959293

Or we could just go to space instead of swimming about in our flippy-floppies.

Might prevent the whole starvation thing. It's either that or we go full Seaquest DSV like OP wants.

[Anonymous No.1959301]

>>1959298

When the aliens invaded they used what their culture deemed an acceptable means of birth control.

It was not a red letter day.

[Anonymous No.1959303]

>>1959299
This will only work when you have somewhere to go.

Now, think that all seafloor is already being used, all hospitable planets too, and you'll see the same problem again. And again. And again.

Hail Malthus :-/

[Anonymous No.1959312]

>>1959301
Thanks for the explanation ^.^

Well, at least we can employ other ways, like restricting the number of children a person can have. Like China already do.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959319]

>>1959299

>>Or we could just go to space instead of swimming about in our flippy-floppies.

>>Might prevent the whole starvation thing. It's either that or we go full Seaquest DSV like OP wants.

How would going to space solve starvation? It's the sea that offers a wealth of edible biomass, not the moon or mars.

>>1959303

>>Hail Malthus :-/

Malthusians are tied with evangelicals who predict the apocalypse for the consistency with which they are proven wrong.

In the 70s, malthusians predicted a mass dieoff by the year 2,000 for lack of food. The unforeseen agricultural innovations of Norman Borlaug multiplied our food production capacity overnight, and the malthusians were thwarted.

The exploitation of the sea is how we will continue to thwart their doomsaying well into the foreseeable future. The world population will plateau not for lack of food but for the reasons the birthrate plateaus in all developed nations. Once the standard of living is high enough people stop churning out babies.

[Anonymous No.1959324]

>>1959303

The Lagrange points? The moon? You're talking about colonizing an inhospitable environment. The sea doesn't have Helium 3. The moon has tons of water.

It's stupid and wasteful to settle planets. Especially as you say that most won't be hospitable at all.

Space stations are the only -permanent- solution. They warrant their extreme cost by how long they can be used. A space station could be used for thousands of years. The sea would corrode and eat almost anything in that time.

I understand what you're saying though. But it is too many temporary gains.

People don't want to live in space, i'll give you that. But they want to live under a roof with 20,000 leagues of water over their heads even less.

Fuck, could you really deal with the fear of going down to the challenger deep? One mistake of engineering, one mistake of maintenance and you're instantly dead. At least on a spaceship you have time to fix something if just a small hole opens up in the craft.

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.1959326]

>>1959303
>all hospitable planets
DYYYYYSOOOOOON SPHEEEEEEEEEEEEREEEEES

[Anonymous No.1959333]

>>1959319

>How would going to space solve starvation? It's the sea that offers a wealth of edible biomass, not the moon or mars.

Bioreactors? Synthetic biology programmed to form an ecosystem in as small a space as possible with as little energy and waste heat as possible? It's not hard. We've already cracked the nut of synthetic biology. It's not unrealistic.

[Anonymous No.1959335]

>>1959326
Are you at all high right now?

[Anonymous No.1959348]

>>1959319
I know Malthusians' history. Even that "the end is coming!" bullshit. However, their central argument - that exponential growth cannot be forever - still applies.

Science saved us from lack of food this time. Will it save us next time? Maybe yes, maybe no. However, one day not even Science will have ways to help us, and we'll be pretty much fucked. We cannot rely in future technologies.

Note that I'm not against sea or space colonies... they can be solutions for many problems. I'm only saying that for THIS problem - overpopulation - they're just hacks, not solutions.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959357]

>>1959324

>>The Lagrange points? The moon? You're talking about colonizing an inhospitable environment. The sea doesn't have Helium 3. The moon has tons of water.

We can't use helium 3 for anything yet. The moon does have water, but you know what else has water? The sea.

>>It's stupid and wasteful to settle planets. Especially as you say that most won't be hospitable at all.

Disagreed. They offer a necessary mass of resources for longterm habitation, most importantly a high concentration of oxygen in the soil (40%)

[Anonymous No.1959358]

>>1959348

But you have no precedence for this. You're just screaming to henny penny that the sky is falling.

let me guess, this is coming from the fallacy that "Science was wrong once, in the past. so it will be wrong again", right?

Yeah. That's such stupid bullshit it'd take me several posts to clear up.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959360]

>>Space stations are the only -permanent- solution. They warrant their extreme cost by how long they can be used. A space station could be used for thousands of years. The sea would corrode and eat almost anything in that time.

In practice, space stations last perhaps a decade or two. Micrometeorites, intense radiation, Exposure to unfiltered direct sunlight and so on weather the exterior and necessitate frequent repairs. We have never had a space station with the longevity you describe.

Undersea structures are commonly coated in anti-corrosives, many of which are bacterial in nature and self-replenish to a degree.

>>I understand what you're saying though. But it is too many temporary gains.

Gains necessary if we're to go to space.

>>People don't want to live in space, i'll give you that. But they want to live under a roof with 20,000 leagues of water over their heads even less. Fuck, could you really deal with the fear of going down to the challenger deep? One mistake of engineering, one mistake of maintenance and you're instantly dead. At least on a spaceship you have time to fix something if just a small hole opens up in the craft.

People won't live that deep. There's no food, no light, and it's too cold. Human habitation will occur exclusively in the daylight zone, which is about 600 feet deep. It offers a beautiful radiant blue vista and immediate access to crustaceans for those averse to hunting fish.

The CO2 scrubbers aboard the ISS are derivatives of the ones used aboard military submarines. The docks we use are derived from designs used on submarines. The hydroponics experiments? First done on submarines.

The ocean demands most of the same technologies space does, but offers a cheaper, easier to reach place to test them and immediate rewards (food, rare earth minerals) for doing so. It's not an end in itself, but it is a necessary stepping stone. Our training wheels before going to the stars.

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.1959364]

>>1959335
Incredibly.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959365]

>>1959333

>>Bioreactors? Synthetic biology programmed to form an ecosystem in as small a space as possible with as little energy and waste heat as possible? It's not hard. We've already cracked the nut of synthetic biology. It's not unrealistic.

This technology does not exist yet and you're proposing it as an alternative to technologies necessary for my proposal which already exist.

I mean if we're going to play that game you may as well suggest that colonizing space is as simple as hopping in your X-Wing, engaging the hyperdrive and flying to Pandora. I mean for fuck's sake, this guy: >>1959326 brought up Dyson Spheres. Technology we're thousands of years away from having.

Living and working in the sea makes sense precisely because the technology exists to do so today, and it will result in a creation of wealth and new technologies which will directly facilitate our expansion into space.

[Anonymous No.1959367]

>>1959357

Okay. do you know what humans do? Humans do not live off the land. If we did, we'd be several billion people than we are now. It's not about finding one buffet to eat from until it is gone forever, like the ocean.

We go places that are inhospitable and we make them hospitable. It is in no way energy efficient to haul construction materials out of a gravity well. You mine asteroids. Oxygen can be created by synthetic bacteria. We won't survive by hiding under the water.

You really sound like the people that think organic farming doesn't use pesticides and is better for you.

[Anonymous No.1959374]

>>1959358
>But you have no precedence for this. You're just screaming to henny penny that the sky is falling.
I just have the precedence of every single species in this planet. Even bacterias.

>let me guess, this is coming from the fallacy that "Science was wrong once, in the past. so it will be wrong again", right?
Not at all. It comes from "Science is not omnipotent."

[sage No.1959375]

People have a naturally greater fascination with the exploration of outer space than with the oceans.

We like to go outwards instead of inward. You can cry all you want about it, but we will be building universities on Mars before we build anything substantial on the sea floor.

Manifest destiny mother fucker.

Pic related. What do you think he would prefer? To sit in some tiny faggot cramped sub at the bottom of the sea, or sitting on a 200 tone rocket playing Steppenwolfs magic carpet ride and headed to Mars?

[Anonymous No.1959383]

Space can't deliver as easily as the ocean because it is a much more remote and inhospitable medium.

Eventually reaching other planets, terraform and colonize them is a much better tradeoff, sorry. This here rock we live in won't last forever even if one of the countless terrestrial and cosmic disasters doesn't get us first. We need to expand, onwards and upwards.

And I'm sorry, but stating that a portion of one planet is able to deliver much more than everything outside said planet is beyond moronic.

It doesn't help that a good part of your rant revolves around the discovery of lifeforms, which surely, is flashy, but ultimately deeply inconsequential and unlikely to be profitable. It's saying that diamonds are of more use than oil because they are flashier.

[Anonymous No.1959387]

>>1959365

Well, let's see. The two biggest hurdles we face in going to space are Heat, and Radiation. What are we going to learn about those under water? How can we magically translate all these wonderful discoveries into space? How can we rad-harden all these things? How will we solve the problems with heat by living at the bottom of the ocean? The ocean is cold. Space isn't.

Really though. besides basic things we can learn in any pressure chamber anywhere, what can we learn in the oceans that we can take right to space?

[Anonymous No.1959389]

Amazing, and yet when the earth is slammed by an asteroid we'll have no back up societies in space and the human race dies a swift death because we didn't think about extiction events.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959396]

>>1959367

>>We go places that are inhospitable and we make them hospitable.

Like the sea floor.

>>It is in no way energy efficient to haul construction materials out of a gravity well. You mine asteroids.

Which requires that you fire an automated mining operation, refinery and return railgun into space. For each asteroid.

>>Oxygen can be created by synthetic bacteria.

That same argument can be used for those suggesting oceanic colonization, you know. Anything you can use to make air in space, you can use to make air underwater. Difference is, those living underwater can also pull oxygen from their surroundings using silicone membranes.

[Anonymous No.1959397]

>>1959387
A sea colony has some different problems that a space colony doesn't have, vice-versa.
However, "sustainability" issues are exactly the same. We need to create in both a whole ecosystem that allows humans to survive in it.

[Anonymous No.1959398]

>>1959374

Except that no other species on this planet has invented science. So that point is moot.

>Not at all. It comes from "Science is not omnipotent."

Oh? People go to doctors when they want it all to be better, when they want it to not be so, when they want the pain to go away. They want miracles and we give it to them. If we are forced to have the responsibility, then why not the authority?

Personally, I want to see the Tower of Babel stand again. I want nothing to be beholden to us. Fuck anything that stands in our way.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959399]

>>We won't survive by hiding under the water.

And we're getting nowhere hiding in tin cans in low earth orbit. Characterizing it as "hiding" is ignorant anyway. The ocean is a whole new frontier, an extreme environment we have yet to meaningfully master, but one which is within grasp to a degree that space is not. It is not a cowardly act to descend into the sea, quite the contrary as I believe you yourself said earlier it is a dangerous, harrowing endeavor, or at least it will be for the first colonists and fulltime explorers. But such is the life of a frontiersman.

If we're to pay for expansion into space it will be via the exploitation of the ocean's wealth. It contains the food we need to sustain a growing population and the energy sources/minerals necessary to sustain their quality of life in spite of dwindling oil supplies.

The ocean contains the resources we need to become a spacefaring civilization. As counterintuitive as it may sound, it's true. It's the last resource rich frontier, necessary to carry us across the home stretch, this last phase of history before humanity finally expands into space to establish a permanent multiplanet society. To fuel that sort of growth you need a new frontier ripe with resources and as of yet unconquered. The sea fits the bill in a way that nothing else does.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959401]

>>1959397

>>However, "sustainability" issues are exactly the same. We need to create in both a whole ecosystem that allows humans to survive in it.

Not the same. An ocean colony is surrounded by edible biomass and can pull in oxygen from surrounding seawater.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959404]

>>1959389

>>Amazing, and yet when the earth is slammed by an asteroid we'll have no back up societies in space and the human race dies a swift death because we didn't think about extiction events.

See:>>1959110

>>"And I'm not saying we should. I am ALL FOR colonies on other worlds."

Spacefags can't read.

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.1959406]

>>1959365
I brought up Dyson Spheres because he brought up all habitable worlds being colonized. We're not gonna have all of them colonized for millions of years at the least.

[Anonymous No.1959407]

>"But NASA," Humanity said, "We must into space!"
>"No Humanity," NASA replied, "You cannot into space."
>Then Humanity was a Deep One.

[Anonymous No.1959409]

>>1959396
>>1959396

>Which requires that you fire an automated mining operation, refinery and return railgun into space. For each asteroid.

You're just incredibly stupid. You build one factory on an asteroid and it builds more ships. The gravity wells of asteroids are negligible you're just being retarded.

Go back to the 70's and give dolphins more acid. You might make a breakthrough in telepathy!

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959410]

>>1959383

>>And I'm sorry, but stating that a portion of one planet is able to deliver much more than everything outside said planet is beyond moronic.

Until you realize that we don't have the means to go beyond Mars at this point. And technically until 2030 we can't even go beyond low Earth orbit.

Spacefags regularly assume access to type III civilization technologies in their arguments and become irate when you point out that we don't have those technologies yet.

>>It doesn't help that a good part of your rant revolves around the discovery of lifeforms, which surely, is flashy, but ultimately deeply inconsequential and unlikely to be profitable. It's saying that diamonds are of more use than oil because they are flashier.

We can eat many of those life forms.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959411]

>>1959409

>>You're just incredibly stupid. You build one factory on an asteroid and it builds more ships. The gravity wells of asteroids are negligible you're just being retarded.

See: >>1959410
>>Spacefags regularly assume access to type III civilization technologies in their arguments and become irate when you point out that we don't have those technologies yet.

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.1959412]

>>1959411
>robots replicating themselves from the asteroid's minerals
>type III civilization technology

[sage No.1959413]

>>1959375

*200 mt

[Anonymous No.1959414]

>>1959411

You think that i meant von neumann machines?

What's wrong with humans making a small shipyard on the asteroid with factories on it as well? Hollowing out asteroids is better than space stations in some regards.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959419]

>>1959412

>>Thinks there's such a thing as a self replicating robot
>>Implicitly assumes it as a solution
>>Proposes that as an alternative to solutions based on existing technology

HEY GUYS I KNOW LET'S USE OUR HELIUM 3 POWERED FUSION REACTORS TO POWER NANOASSEMBLERS WHICH WILL CONSTRUCT A SPACE ELEVATOR WHICH WE CAN RIDE UP TO OUR ALCUBIERRE DRIVE VESSEL WHICH WE CAN THEN RIDE TO OUR DYSON SPHERE WHERE CLONES OF NEYTIRI AND THAT GREEN WOMAN FROM STAR TREK TOS WILL BE WAITING FOR US HUEHUEHUEHUE

For FUCK'S SAKE

[Anonymous No.1959422]

>>1959419

[Anonymous No.1959423]

You are inserting an unneeded middleman. If you still argue that in the end space exploration is the correct route, why should we deviate funds from it to research a field it will not get a benefit from? We won't make speedier spacecraft or harness terraforming better from exploring the deeps. We are better just keeping at the space program.

[Anonymous No.1959425]

> Spacefags regularly assume access to type III civilization technologies in their arguments and become irate when you point out that we don't have those technologies yet.


Type III civilization tech?

You would need this tech tens of thousands of years before you could become Type III. Arguably it's necessary to successfully become Type II.

[Anonymous No.1959426]

>>1959419

and you're not quoting the TV show Seaquest DSV? shit, the intro sounds word for word what you're taking about.

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.1959427]

>>1959419
Actually I'm the guy always saying 'Fusion is not that important, solar and geothermal power are enough for now'

And U mad?

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959433]

>>1959422

[Anonymous No.1959438]

>>1959433

>O'neil cylinders.

>designed by a physics professor as a means of demonstrating the feasibility of space colonies

You're just lashing out at everything now aren't you? Should we go into MS paint and doctor a picture of Rapture with some inane quip at the bottom as a retort?

[Anonymous No.1959440]

>>1959410
>Until you realize that we don't have the means to go beyond Mars at this point. And technically until 2030 we can't even go beyond low Earth orbit.

>Spacefags regularly assume access to type III civilization technologies in their arguments and become irate when you point out that we don't have those technologies yet.

Thing is, we will have them if we keep at it. What makes you so impatient to want to get immediate benefit from the smaller system? Don't worry, even if sea exploration recieves a fraction of the space program's funds, it'll still be complete sooner.

>We can eat many of those life forms.

Okay, that's a point, but we already have landbound food.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959441]

>>1959426

>>and you're not quoting the TV show Seaquest DSV? shit, the intro sounds word for word what you're taking about.

I'm describing technologies that exist. This thread is full of pictures that attest to it. We understand very well how to live underwater. We haven't yet because traditional farming still meets our needs and China's embargo of rare earth minerals is fairly recent.

As I said I think ordinary people displaced by rising tides will live on seasteads, as it's cheaper in terms of operational costs. It will be miners, farmers, soldiers and scientists who live and work underwater.

I'm not and have never suggested we abandon the space program. It is crucial for our longterm survival. I am only suggesting a radical expansion of our oceanic exploration program with a view to exploiting the sea for energy, rare earth minerals and food.

Why? Because every stage in the development of human civilization, every major advance was fueled by the exploitation of some new frontier. But we've run out. Space is where we want to go, but that last rung on the ladder is missing. We need that final push in terms of energy and resources to get there, and it will come from the sea.

[Anonymous No.1959444]

>>1959398
>Except that no other species on this planet has invented science. So that point is moot.
No, it's not. Every species requires energy/food input, and when it lacks, the species stop growing and mortality goes way up.

>Oh? People go to doctors when [...]
Miracles? It's SCIENCE, it's not a magical wand.
The point you're completely missing: we CANNOT rely in technologies we don't have at hand, like future techs.

[Anonymous No.1959450]

>>1959441

>We understand very well how to live underwater.

Really? Name one undersea anything that is populated by laymen. No really. Go ahead. Name one undersea installation or colony or anything that can be staffed by no-nothing normal people.

Not to mention all this stuff about getting food and oxygen from the ocean isn't in the least bit sustainable in the amounts you're talking about.

You're just one of those human-hating hippies who thinks everything would be better if we just gave up technology and lived under the sea like our dolphin soulbretheren.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959452]

>>1959440

>>What makes you so impatient to want to get immediate benefit from the smaller system?

Because it represents a huge source of wealth that we've neglected up until now because of the initial barrier to exploitation, a barrier which has become weaker over time as the technology used to penetrate it has increased in sophistication and decreased in cost.

That wealth will give us the rare earth magnets and cathode/anode materials for electric cars and trains, for fuel cells to power cargo trucks and ships, the neodymium for wind and sea turbines, the cobalt, copper and other minerals for nontoxic next gen solar panels and so on.

Every technology necessary to get us through this next stage in the development of our civilization and onward to becoming a multiplanet species is in the sea. It's so convenient I wouldn't blame a religious man for suggesting it was placed there for us, locked away just securely enough that we'd be able to get to it right when we needed it most.

Not being a retard I don't see it that way but the convenience and timeliness is still pretty ass blasting. It's just what we need right now and it's the only way forward as I see it.

[Anonymous No.1959455]

>>1958696
she was eaten :,(

[Anonymous No.1959456]

>>1959444
>No, it's not. Every species requires energy/food input, and when it lacks, the species stop growing and mortality goes way up.

God you're stupid. Science allows us to increase our food yield. Bacteria don't have that. Yet you think we're the same? Speak for yourself.


>The point you're completely missing: we CANNOT rely in technologies we don't have at hand, like future techs.

Then we should not worry about problems we don't yet have to face. As you say, we'll have the technology for when it comes.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959458]

>>1959450

>>You're just one of those human-hating hippies who thinks everything would be better if we just gave up technology and lived under the sea like our dolphin soulbretheren.

Horseshit, retard. I advocate exploitation of the sea, not conservation. I'm as far from a hippie as it gets. I advocate it because it directly benefits humanity; it's a lump sum of resources that will provide us the final push we need to expand into space.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959468]

>>1959450

>>You're just one of those human-hating hippies who thinks everything would be better if we just gave up technology and lived under the sea like our dolphin soulbretheren.

I advocate exploitation of the sea, not conservation. I'm as far from a hippie as it gets. I advocate it because it directly benefits humanity; it's a lump sum of resources that will provide us the final push we need to expand into space.

[Anonymous No.1959469]

>>1957618
>The ocean offers us everything we want from space, and more
>implying we get sunlight from the sea

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959470]

>>1959469

I meant space exploration. Everything we want from space exploration. Not literally everything that comes from space.

[Anonymous No.1959471]

>>1959410
>Spacefags regularly assume access to type III civilization technologies in their arguments and become irate when you point out that we don't have those technologies yet.

AMEN!

[Anonymous No.1959472]

>>1959450
>HIPPIES NIGGERS LIBERULZ AND PETARDZ THEY BE STEELIN MAI FREEDUM AND SPACE BUDGETS! WELFARE IS STEALING MAI MONEIS
this argument is getting old...

[Anonymous No.1959476]

Europa here. The tripfag has a point, space travel will eventually benefit from ocean exploration. You should get to it before trying to find an emplacement past Mars, it'll help, you'll see.

[Anonymous No.1959486]

>>1959476
Sorry to break it for you, but we already have a favorite for building a moon base. And it's not you.

[Anonymous No.1959489]

seriously guys

underwater colonies and relevant network will prepare us for space exploration

we will have to deal with isolated challenging environments giving us experience and plus we will be able to access and exploit additional natural resources

plus re-supplying when needed will be far easier and cost effective than launching a space-shuttle every time the colonists are running out of mayonnaise

same goes for rescue attempts in case of fuckup

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1959495]

>>1959489

Now that's what I'm talkin about. It's the practice that pays for itself.

[Anonymous No.1959512]

>>1959060
and space cannot contemporarily offer us anything more than astrogeek's fapmaterial

deep sea exploration would be an easier alternative in order to get experience and technognosis on hostile environment colonies before we start throwing moneys, fuel, material and experts to the endless void

[Anonymous No.1959519]

Baby steps into the great unknown.

[Anonymous No.1959557]

>>1957618
So space research has been worthless, OP?
Are you going to deny the beauty of this?
This is just an example, there is much more. Maybe it's not life or amazing creatures...But hell, if there's an omnipotent being/energy out there it must look so close to this or something out there. I'm so in love.

[Anonymous No.1959566]

>>1959557
Nobody is saying don't go to space, what is being debated is the value of side-by-side exploration of the oceans

[Anonymous No.1959576]

>>1959557
>Are you going to deny the beauty of this?
artificially colored

[Anonymous No.1959577]

>>1959456
>As you say, we'll have the technology for when it comes.
Quote me saying this, liar.
The future problem is obvious. Its solution is not, that's why we cannot rely in a FUTURE technology.

Putting in very simple terms:
1. Science allow us to use better energy, not create energy.
2. Food is energy.
3. We have finite energy input in Earth (sunlight).
4. So, we have a FINITE food input maximum in Earth.

Every single person ITT knows this, except maybe you.

>God you're stupid. Science allows us to increase our food yield.
As can everyone ITT see, the only stupid person here is the one thinking "huuurrr durr sience craetes food from nowere its a fuckin mirakel!" - you.

[Anonymous No.1959583]

>>1959576
Yeah, so we can differ the brightests spots. Does not change the fact that it is still beautiful.

[Anonymous No.1959584]

>>1959456
BTW, talking about gods in /sci/ for maximum stupidness.
You, sir, are an idiot.

[Anonymous No.1959598]

>let's explore the oceans
>let's explore space! fuck the ocean!

=

>let's go diving! we have the equipment and the ocean is right next to our house!
>boring! let's have a road trip instead
>but dude, we don't have a car or a driving license!
>so? we wait 'till we get one

[Bellum !ua.4n.VlKQ No.1959603]

>>1959598
We can go dive, get a car license and go have a road trip.
One thing doesn't exclude another ^.^

[Anonymous No.1959612]

>>1959577
>claims that immidiate space exploration will in the near future provide more energy than it will consume

solar is still more than enough for sustaining food production for our population for many generations

also we can have geothermal and to a lesser extent nuclear

[Bellum !ua.4n.VlKQ No.1959628]

>>1959612
>solar is still more than enough for sustaining food production for our population for many generations
"For our population". How much people? 6,5 billions? Yes, it is.
13 billions? 26 billions? Looks like we'll need to do some math.

[Bellum !ua.4n.VlKQ No.1959632]

>>1959612
>also we can have geothermal and to a lesser extent nuclear

The cool thing about nuclear energy is, we already have the tech to use it. Geothermal still needs lots of improvement to be really that much useful.

[Anonymous No.1959637]

>>1959628
protip: FOR ALL THE FUCKING ORGANISMS ON THE PLANET FOR AS LONG AS THERE ARE PLANTS AND ALGAE

human starvation in niggercontinent and similar shitholes have to do with politics and econs, not primary production

Malthus is a fag.

[Anonymous No.1959639]

>>1959632
>Geothermal still needs lots of improvement to be really that much useful.
theoritically it has near troll-physics potential of efficiency

we will run out of U-235 eventually

[Anonymous No.1959641]

People want underwater cities?

Has nobody PLAYED BIOSHOCK?

[Bellum !ua.4n.VlKQ No.1959651]

>>1959637
>protip: FOR ALL THE FUCKING ORGANISMS ON THE PLANET FOR AS LONG AS THERE ARE PLANTS AND ALGAE
You're right about this - I was thinking only about human energy necessities, not biota's.

>human starvation in niggercontinent and similar shitholes have to do with politics and econs, not primary production
I'm not using Africa as a basis... their problem FOR NOW is "only" politics and econs, as you said.

>Malthus is a fag.
Yet, thanks to him, Darwin saw the competition as evolution's driving force.

[Anonymous No.1959656]

>dolphin assassins

[Bellum !ua.4n.VlKQ No.1959705]

>>1959656
> >dolphin assassins
Protip: dolphin meat tastes like pig.

[Anonymous No.1959706]

>Yet, thanks to Malthus, Darwin saw the competition as evolution's driving force.
and thanks to some farmer growing apples Newton was inspired with the equation for gravity

so what?

[Anonymous No.1959709]

>>1959705
so does human

[Anonymous No.1959715]

I don't think dolphins are our mental equavalents. Space exploration isn't just about finding alien life.

[Anonymous No.1959717]

>>1959709
> implying you're a cannibal

[Anonymous No.1959721]

>>1959557
derp pretty pictures.

[Anonymous No.1959730]

Without reading the whole thread, what do you do Mad Scientist?

[Anonymous No.1959743]

>>1959730

He is unemployed.

Also, he was kicked out of art school for sexually molesting an underage girl in class.

[Anonymous No.1959849]

>>1959715
>I don't think dolphins are our mental equavalents
you don't go out a lot, do you?

[Anonymous No.1959854]

>>1959743
tl;dr: real bro

[Anonymous No.1959864]

>>1959849
Fair enough. They're the intelligent person's equal, and the average person's (i.e. you) superior.

[Bellum !ua.4n.VlKQ No.1959906]

>>1959706
So thank Malthus and consider a bit more his ideas.
(And thank too the apple farmer.)

Seriously, I don't really care if Malthus was a paedo/priest/fag, if he was X or was Y, I'm defending just one of Malthus' ideas, that overpopulation means death, suffer and shitty life.

Until now we was talking about lack of food, but it's about every resource we use. The resources are finite, period - yes, even renewable resources, they come at a finite ration.

>>1959709
My captcha was made for you. ^.^

[Anonymous No.1959925]

>>1957956
What the fuck.
We aren't even CLOSE to running out of space.

You really are space-cadets.

[Anonymous No.1959940]

>>1959348
You haven't even TRIED to inform yourself about what is REALLY happening in the world. First-world birth rates are stable or declining. The world will hit a max population and begin declining, probably within our lifetimes.
http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_shows_the_best_stats_you_ve_ever_seen.html

[Bellum !ua.4n.VlKQ No.1959977]

>>1959940
>First-world birth rates are stable or declining
>First-world

I just hope that the world as a whole stabilizes BEFORE we run out of resources... :-/

[Anonymous No.1959983]

>>1959977
>run out of resources
Don't worry about it. China has it's shit MORE than under control, and if India goes into hardcore starvation mode, they sure as hell won't be pouring into the US by the millions. No country will allow it.

Besides, that TED talk (there's another, more recent by the same guy) shows how clearly and steadily the third world is maturing, in both affluence and declining family size.

tl;dr the sky isn't falling

[Bellum !ua.4n.VlKQ No.1959988]

>>1959983
>China has it's shit MORE than under control
How they did that? Birth control.

So, thanks for supporting my point :-D

[Anonymous No.1959992]

>>1959988
Get out of your high-school debate mode, asshat. I wasn't even TRYING to argue with you. And you act all smug because I say something you agree with?

Go fuck a cactus.

[Bellum !ua.4n.VlKQ No.1959993]

>>1959983
>the sky isn't falling
BTW, where I said the sky were falling? I was even mocking "the end is coming", my worries aren't about mythological apocalypses.

[Bellum !ua.4n.VlKQ No.1959998]

>>1959992
>Get out of your high-school debate mode, asshat
Nah.

[Anonymous No.1959999]

>>1959988
>>1959993
Calm yourself, you're imagining attacks that don't exist.

[Bellum !ua.4n.VlKQ No.1960001]

>Go fuck a cactus.
It has less needles than your momma.

[Bellum !ua.4n.VlKQ No.1960004]

>>1959999
Fuck you. THAT WERE MY GET!!!!!!!!!!!

[now, serious]I'm calm, just a bit worried about future gens...

[Anonymous No.1960005]

>>1959998
>>1960001
LOL filtered

[Anonymous No.1960007]

>>1960004
You still haven't watched that TED talk, have you?

[Bellum !ua.4n.VlKQ No.1960012]

>>1960007
I was busy here: >>1959971

[Anonymous No.1960039]

That TED talk is fucking incredible. What would I study in university to get into shit like that? Stats?

[Anonymous No.1960047]

>>1958311
As cool as Isopods are, they will never be cool as a true Trilobite.

;_;

[Anonymous No.1960059]

Dolphins don't just save people, they commit infantcide, murder porpoises to use them as pool toys and have been known to playfully drown people. Heck, they'd probably commit genocide if they had hands.

[Anonymous No.1960069]

>>1960004
Who cares about your future gens? You're not even going to be consciously aware that they exist. Realistically speaking, you shouldn't bother with anything that exists after you die.

[Anonymous No.1960550]

OP, you've inspired me to switch from physics to biology. Maybe someday when I'm rich from bio research jobs, I'll become an architect, too.

[Anonymous No.1960575]

>>1960069
It's irrational to only be concerned about yourself.

[Anonymous No.1961882]

Interesting shit.

Next time I recommend leaving the part out about NASA failing and making this a comparison pissing match. Both are cool, each has their own merits. Should have just focused on the positives and talked about it as a single subject. Unless pissing matches are your thing.
And maybe refraining from molesting the underage girl in your class.

[Anonymous No.1961940]

>>1958976
My dad got me one of those cups when I was 6.
He worked off shore on a remote control sub, or whatever.
Shit was so cash, had my name and everything.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1961985]

>>1961882

>>And maybe refraining from molesting the underage girl in your class

This never happened. When I was 24 I dated a 17 year old girl. The expulsion was due to 'religious intolerance' for offending a different girl, Lacy, by arguing that Sylvia Browne is not actually psychic and that spirits aren't real. This happened in a different state entirely and about a year passed between the two.

Somehow these events were combined into one, maybe out of sincere confusion or maybe I've offended someone who took it upon themselves to shit up my reputation. I don't know.

Not cool, though.

[Anonymous No.1961986]

>>1961940
Not on a remote control sub.

[Anonymous No.1962025]

iiii love you jeeeeeesus christ!

[Anonymous No.1962101]

By 2030 there will be colonies on the moons of Mars, Phobos or Deimos.
http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/70669,news-comment,news-politics,100-year-starship-nasa-pl
an-for-humans-to-colonise-galaxy

How long till you think this will actually happen? I hope the private sector actually starts bumping money into these types of projects.

Holy shit, you got booted from school for that? Did you go to school in the fucking 60's?

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1962202]

>>1962101

>>Holy shit, you got booted from school for that? Did you go to school in the fucking 60's?

No, I had no common sense and I upset a very, very popular girl. Popular with teachers, popular with other students and will a small army of former boyfriends, future hopefuls and friendzoners.

It's not like I started the discussion. She did and she invited everyone interested to participate. It just seems she didn't anticipate or really want a skeptical perspective, but rather a receptive audience who she could gush to about psychics, guardian angels, auras and whatnot.

Anyway she had a nervous breakdown after I had left. Alligator tears I think, although she really was pretty emotionally fragile as I learned from those who knew her after the fact. The severity of her distress convinced whoever she complained to that I had done something much more terrible than I had, and pretty much all the guys she knew were willing to vouch for her side of the story. I had one witness, guy named Alan who was there when it happened. Didn't help.

Moral of the story: Don't fuck with the queen bee.

[Anonymous No.1962244]

>>1962202
Moral of the story: Should have just gone with the rape.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1962262]

Anyway, back on topic.

I present for your consideration: Scuba cat.

[Anonymous No.1962281]

>>1962262
Its like, why do you really want to go to the sea so much? I don't understand how you can say "omg look at these fish theyre so fucking cool" one minute and then talk about dysprosium and industry the next. or do you just have a huge hard on for the ocean?

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1962300]

>>1962281

>>Its like, why do you really want to go to the sea so much?

I go through periods of obsession with different fields. Some are lasting, like my love of robots, nuclear power and electric vehicles. Some come and go.

What seems to hold the strongest lasting interest for me is the whole concept of human beings living where it shouldn't be possible. Before my "undersea habitat" phase I went through a Lunar/Martian colony phase. And increasingly I've become interested in arctic science outposts for the same reasons.

Something about human beings building their own living spaces from the ground up, completely artificial and designed to meet their basic biological needs really fascinates me. It's empowering I guess, the notion that we can create comfortable spaces for human beings to live and work in regions that would otherwise be instantly lethal. It's a triumph of the human spirit, no?

[Anonymous No.1962321]

this thread has been going for 24 hours

[Anonymous No.1962336]

>>1962300
I guess so. One question: are you concerned with the current state of the ocean ecosystems as far as pollution and overfishing are concerned? Or do you see resources as a tool for mankind to use to aid this triumph? It seems to me that we if we venture into the oceans now, we risk rendering them worse off than before because of our habits of waste and insustainability.

[Mad Scientist !!Q11PG81nz2n No.1962369]

>>1962336

>> One question: are you concerned with the current state of the ocean ecosystems as far as pollution and overfishing are concerned?

Yeah, to some degree.

>>Or do you see resources as a tool for mankind to use to aid this triumph?

This, mostly.

>>It seems to me that we if we venture into the oceans now, we risk rendering them worse off than before because of our habits of waste and insustainability.

Possibly. But development of the sea is different from development on land. Mainly because any submersible you use is going to be some type of electric vehicle (another interest of mine) which means it doesn't pollute sea water. And the isolated nature of an undersea structure means the use of solar, wind and hydrothermal is necessary, all very "green" sources of power.

Deep sea mining has the potential to be damaging, but the Aquarius, during it's observation of the oil spill, noted no ill effect on the reefs. We don't know much about how sea life would react to deep sea mining. Most of the stuff we'd be removing is already exposed to the seawater, and aren't especially toxic. And it's in regions of the sea that are largely lifeless anyway.

The greatest threat to the sea is increasing acidification and overfishing. The first is the result of surface industries, and we're working on reducing the pollution from those already. The second is a legitimate concern, but in the same way that over-hunting and over-harvesting was prior to the invention of agriculture. That's the longterm solution to overfishing; seafloor farming. Do down there what we've been doing up here for thousands of years.

Pictured; geodesic sphere arctic habitat. I sold my dad on the idea of a geodesic dome about a year ago, I'll be helping him build one pretty soon. Big admirer of Buckminster Fuller, looking forward to the project a lot.

[Anonymous No.1962415]

>>1962369
Well for the record, I hope all your DIY hampster submersibles and geodesic domes work out, you seem like a dude who knows his shit. The world could use more people interested in the advancement of science and humanity in general.

[Anonymous No.1962789]

Haha where the hell are you going to build a geodesic dome at? You got a hamster underwater habitat, building a group telepresence robot setup, building a geodesic dome. You need to start a science hobby shop.