Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Occupy outer space

Posted 2 years ago on Nov. 19, 2012, 10:46 a.m. EST by phrygian20 (4)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

The government is using tax dollars to research new technology for a manned mission to mars. When this technology is perfected the rich will privatize it to mine mineral resources on asteroids and other near planetary bodies for profit without any taxation at all. Not to mention the further militarization of space. If or when the rich are able to achieve this they will be more rich and powerful than could ever have been imagined. This would effectively bring capitalism to outer space and expand the military industrial complex to near science fiction levels. Fortunately the inherent challenges to achieving this goal are staggering. However we must never underestimate the persistence of the rich to achieve their goals. Mining of near planetary bodies would not necessarily be a bad thing if the 1% had the character of someone like Peter Cooper but unfortunately the 1% has more of the character of someone like Rockefeller so this endeavor has grave implications for the 99%. Let’s face the facts. The 1 percent wouldn’t have funded eugenics & human behavioral experiments & instigate wars & all of the horrible things they do just for profit alone. The ultimate goal is world domination. No matter what century, there have always been people who can be classified as the 1% whose ultimate goal is to rule the world. But, controlling the majority of resources in the world has traditionally been seen as the only feasible way to be able to have enough weaponry and power to dominate the world & since resources are as scattered as they are here on earth, world domination has remained elusive. China and Russia are prepared to defend themselves & the resources within their territories & even much of South America has been politically distancing itself from the U.S. But, whoever capitalizes on the resources outside of the earth first will potentially have the power to dominate everything. They must not be allowed to succeed.

Here is some credible evidence regarding my statements...




Noam Chomsky: The Militarization of Science and Space http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESKmBjMV-y4





I humbly suggest that a campaign be created to occupy outer space.



Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

No i agree with them doing this 100% space is the next frontier. The next generation of energy is in space and on the moon.

Dont protest a science movement

to add

No one person can own space bodies as stated in law by the UN

To my knowledge of space mining it is all be invested by private companies and certain individuals such as James Cameron and Larry Page. These mining operation is an alternative to mining on earth it would be a place of oprotunity for those who have skills and knowledge

This is also about laying the tracks down for future generations of space travel. Earth is getting smaller and smaller everyday. We need to leave but we cant leave until we invest research into these ideas.

NASA has given us so many inventions and initiative products. It also has impacted the science industry at a massive level with miles of research papers and and data.



[-] 2 points by farmer88 (40) 2 years ago

Mining on the Moon and on Mars and asteroids would be so "green" too, it literally wouldn't harm the Earth at all.

[-] 2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

It would extend the war for resources to outer space. Pirate space ships would intercept cargo from the asteroids. Our problem is not one of resources, but of greed.

[-] 1 points by farmer88 (40) 2 years ago

Pirate space ships? Are you serious or are you delusional?

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

About as delusional as thinking that firing tens of thousands of rockets from earth to extract these resources wouldn't harm the earth.

[-] 1 points by farmer88 (40) 2 years ago

You do realize how fast these rockets escape the Earth's atmosphere and are not harming the atmosphere any longer. Plus, if we can develop such things like space elevators or using the Moon as a launch pad (less gravity so less fuel needed) to send rockets to asteroids, even less harm. You have to think outside the box my friend, consider possibilities. Especially since we don't need "tens of thousands of rockets" in order to pull this kind of stuff off. You literally need two-three Heavy Lift Vehicles, at most, to pull off most of this stuff.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

The ISS will take more than 40 rocket launches to assemble.


How will 2 or 3 heavy lift vehicles transport all of the required men and material plus life support to the moon, mine the material, fire it back, survive the heat stress of reentry, and do it economically? Sounds like a tremendous amount of energy would be required.

[-] 1 points by farmer88 (40) 2 years ago

That's still only 40 rocket launches over the course of YEARS. Only need two-three HLVs to move material over the course of a couple years, especially if we can continue scientific research that would allow these asteroids to be mined remotely without requiring manned support. Heck, in my opinion, we could probably do much of it using a skeleton crew located either on the Moon (less preferable) or Mars (more preferable). Robotics is fascinating these days, I can't imagine what we could do with more research funding.

The "heat stress" when it comes to material isn't THAT important, just put it into a container that can survive re-entry without disintegrating, and let it crash into the ocean or a bare spot on land where it can be recovered.

The "energy" can be supplemented by, you know, doing RESEARCH and building more advanced rockets that require less energy, as well as if a lot of this stuff is sent to the Moon, it would require exponentially LESS energy to then simply "throw" it off the Moon to other regions using a space gun (which isn't actually a military weapon, rather a propulsion system).

[-] 0 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

pirate ships really

[-] 2 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

yeah actually in a way you are correct plus there is a higher density of minerals per asteroid.

[-] 1 points by farmer88 (40) 2 years ago

Not only a higher density, but there are many Rare Earth Elements in much higher quantities in astroids, the Moon, and Mars, that would take much work to mine out of the crust of the Earth.

Gold, cobalt, iron, manganese, molybdenum, nickel, osmium, palladium, platinum, rhenium, rhodium, ruthenium, and tungsten, among others, could be found in asteroids. Harvesting these from asteroids and other objects in the solar system instead of the Earth would greatly preserve the environment.

There are also elements like Helium-3 that are extremely rare on Earth, but are believed to exist in higher quantities in like the Moon. Helium-3 could help us a lot with things such as FUSION energy, which would ALSO preserve the environment.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

O yeah Helium-3 is abundant on moon since it recharges from radiation from the sun. Its a weird and awesome system that will be taped into if fusion works as an energy source.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Just don't be an Oppenheimer.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

i have no drive to build bombs just civilizations

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

You know what I mean. The whole regret because it was marvelous science at the time thang.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

For this i dont see a regret. I see a possibility of failure but i do not see a direct negative like what he did.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Well, if we say that all wars are over the world's scarce resources then he may have a valid point.

That said, I think that there is much to be gained even with the possibility of failure.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

good and so do i

To the idea that there is a limit of resources of space is lie there is ever growing resources. Just always keep that in mind when looking at the stars and moon.

[-] 1 points by phrygian20 (4) 2 years ago

Mining of near planetary bodies would not necessarily be a bad thing if the 1% had the character of someone like Peter Cooper but unfortunately the 1% has more of the character of someone like Rockefeller so this endeavor has grave implications for the 99%.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

I think we have our hands full just trying to focus on occupying the vote and the wage.

[-] 1 points by phrygian20 (4) 2 years ago

Noam Chomsky: The Militarization of Science and Space


[-] 1 points by Clancy (42) 2 years ago

It is great if they mine in outer space. Virtually no harm to the earth plus we would really need the ree's that are in asteroids and the moon . It might also be a little tough to occupy space.

[-] 1 points by Underdog (2971) from Clermont, FL 2 years ago

This concern is valid, I believe. Although the average man/woman is not focused on such things as this, the Rich and Powerful certainly are. They are focused on anything that can give them an advantage. If there is profit and/or material gain to be had in space then they will be persuing it, because their evil selfishness and greed knows no bounds. And if, by chance, their goals just happen to have some bad consequences for the human population as a by-product of their greed, then...oh well...that's just an unfortunate cost of doing business.

After all...business is business... isn't it?


[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22338) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

1st we need to order our house - Earth ( inner space? ) - and in the ordering/straightening-up of our house - dumping fossil fuel use - implementing green technology - setting up all peoples to benefit from clean energy independence - removing the common reason for strife - armed conflict - then perhaps we can see a sane and united effort to prosper from outer space.

[-] 1 points by farmer88 (40) 2 years ago

We can dump fossil fuel use and implement green technology AND have energy independence if we start going the outer space route. I just solved three of the issues you brought up. Combine that with a cleaner environment from less mining in general and BAM!

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22338) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

BTW - the 1st race for space was fueled by military concerns - not wants of material resources to make a better world. MILITARY CONCERNS

Those concerns have not vanished.

[-] 1 points by farmer88 (40) 2 years ago

We still got plenty of peaceful technology out of it.

[-] -1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

How can you say those concerns haven't vanished. We haven't seen a rapid surge of wanting to build war satellites which are illegal in the eyes of the U.N. Nor is anyone scared of anyone bombing them from space like we were in the 80's.

The thing is we see more people wanting to go to space as a private companies invest more and more into engineers to go into space.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22338) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

And you see this happening faster then building a green tech society? A society that has defeated the reasons for strife? Ummm I think you need to pull your head out of the universe and approach this in a logical progression.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

I am, what made us develop better solar panels we all love NASA for the space station. So if we see that technology and space travel are one of the same we must realize that yes we must invest into the future.


and here is more


and even more


[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (22338) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

You Are??? "I am what made us develop solar panels we all love"

We have not taken advantage of one one-hundredth of the technical advancements achieved in developing our space program to this point in time - for the advancement of society - here in the USA and not around the world either. The investment needs to be made now - here - on EARTH.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

forgot the comma.

Earth is already heading in the correct direction. There is no reason to worry.

What are some of these technologies that you see that are not being used and wish to be redistributed to earth.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22338) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Not gonna go down that road with you again DB.

Do you seriously think that we can make space pay-off peacefully - for all - prior to solving our little earthly domestic issues?

What is your time line?

Not something you expect to see accomplished in your lifetime is it?

[-] 1 points by farmer88 (40) 2 years ago

Of course space can pay off peacefully. Look at literally anything that has a computer inside it. A lot of technology that is used in the third world, like water purification, was originally developed for use in space missions like Apollo.

[-] 0 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

Domestic issues will never be solved as it is human nature to ensure fights. Now do i think the space movement will be peaceful absolutely. Look at space today we see a joint venture from multiple nations and universities.

I know most of these things will be done in my life time. it really all depends for the timeline since im notwith these companis i do not know how close they actually are.

But i would suspect it would look like this

• 2020 mining of asteroids actually begins

• 2025 moon base established

• 2030 fusion power

• 2040 Mars base

honestly a lot can happen we could have a break through in technology or a regression. It all depends on the climate that the scientist have.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (22338) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Power technology break through-s are not being implemented here on earth. Break through implementation needed to outfit even a start-up of space industry. 2020 mining of asteroids? Really? It is nearly 2013 and you expect to see in 7 years - a stupendous technical achievement - this in just being able to mine the 1st asteroid - one that happens to be floating in the near vicinity of earth so that it can be captured. U R 2 Funny.

[-] 1 points by farmer88 (40) 2 years ago

You do realize the advancements we made in space between 1960 and 1969 are tantamount to going from room-sized computers to the computers we have today in the same time frame. That's a hell of a technological leap. We can do it. People with your terrible enthusiasm won't help.

[-] 0 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

Japanese Space Agency’s Hayabusa spacecraft, which successfully returned a few hundred dust particles from asteroid 25143 Itokawa in 2010. yes it was dust but that was two years ago things move fast. The amount that are within our reach is greater than you think.

what do you mean by power technology break through are not being implemented here on earth.

[-] 0 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

its a communication satellite that isn't want brings death

also watched those video they have no idea that predators are just airplanes. the movie was way over generalized of data and in sometimes just wrong.

[-] 0 points by farmer88 (40) 2 years ago

What's your point? I don't see any point to this.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22338) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

See that is an ongoing problem - everyone would just like issues to go away - rather then face them and take care of them properly. And - yep here you are - advocating that we ignore the mess in our home ( earth ) with all of its contentions - and just jump past the contentions already in existence to add a new contention - outer space resources- the next level towards extending the misery that is being suffered right here on earth?

Issues need to be dealt with - not continually pushed aside.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (22338) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

You have ( IMO ) put the cart before the Horse.

A step in the right direction to promote sanity and health for ALL:

The National Campaign to End Corporate Personhood and Demand Real Democracy! Move to Amend

About | Donate | Take Action

The Best Democracy Money Can Buy

Immediately following Election Day, the rhetoric flowing from our elected officials in Washington was all about the ‘fiscal cliff.’ Unfortunately they were not referring to the costs of this election.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, this campaign season was the most expensive in history, topping out at an estimated $6 billion.

The presidential race was slightly less costly than the last one; slightly more money was spent in House and Senate races this year. “Dark” money from Super PACs, unleashed by Citizens United, totaled over $540 million, while non-profit interest groups spent $351 million. Incumbents, who spend 30% to 70% of their time raising money, continued to retain a big advantage over challengers.

When you consider the amount of money flowing into our elections and the time elected officials spend raising money, it’s no wonder we are nearing a fiscal cliff. Policies that benefit only corporate America and their wealthy allies have brought us to this precipice, and there’s no end in sight. It is more than likely that the majority of us will be further victimized by pending austerity measures on the horizon.

It is said we have the best democracy money can buy. We wonder how long our democracy can survive under the principle that money is speech, which is why Move to Amend is calling for a Constitutional amendment that clearly states money is not speech, and corporations are not entitled to the same rights as people.

In this election awash with corporate and dark money, over 150 of ballot initiatives supporting our amendment language passed in communities across the nation. Folks are waking up to the damage these huge sums of money have on our democracy, which proves Move to Amend is on the right track.

We’re part of a movement to reclaim our democracy, and we’re winning. Please help us expand our reach -- ask your friends to sign our petition so we can grow our numbers and repeat these successes in the next election.

In solidarity,

Ashley Sanders, Ben Manski, Daniel Lee, David Cobb, Egberto Willies, Jerome Scott, Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap, Laura Bonham, George (Leesa) Friday, Nancy Price, Stephen Justino

Move to Amend Executive Committee

MOVE TO AMEND PO Box 610, Eureka CA 95502 | (707) 269-0984 | www.MoveToAmend.org

We, the People of the United States of America, reject the U.S. Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling, and move to amend our Constitution to firmly establish that money is not speech, and that human beings, not corporations, are persons entitled to constitutional rights.

Donate | Facebook | Twitter

[-] 1 points by farmer88 (40) 2 years ago

What are you even talking about? This has nothing to do with scientific research.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (22338) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

It goes to the fact that corpoRATions need to be knocked down to size - brought back to earth one might say - as they are ruining this planet - they are running amok - they feel that they are above the law.

[-] 1 points by farmer88 (40) 2 years ago

That still has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

[-] 0 points by Coyote88 (-24) 2 years ago

Okay. So you are against the space program. And I think that politicizing the space program, as you are trying to do, is contemptible.

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

A) Lets face it, me and you are never going to be able to create anything in space, so is capitalism in space better than nothing? Im not sure.

B) Staying focused here on earth in the present is hard enough already.

[-] 0 points by farmer88 (40) 2 years ago

You're a moron. Granted, whoever does mine the resources on asteroids and the Moon and Mars and other areas of space will become wealthy beyond their wildest dreams. However, they have to not crash the market first with an absolute FLOOD of resources. If someone dumped millions upon millions of tons of iron ore into the economy, the value would absolutely drop through the floor. Also, imagine the tax income coming from these resources being sold and collected and such. Even if the tax rates were low, there would be so much being bought and sold.

Second, the lowered prices of these essential resources would probably drop the price of other things associated with them as well. It's not possible to just horde all these resources because there is so much of it.

Third, the scientific research needed to even pull this stuff off in the first place would benefit humanity as a whole. It may even allow people to start traveling to the Moon or Mars as entrepreneurs to build stuff or do research on their own. It also exhorts people to keep inventing here on Earth, if you can come up with a cheaper way of doing ANYTHING that has to do with manned trips in outer space, your idea WILL be used because governments and private groups will do ANYTHING to lower the price costs because it is so expensive.

You need to think these things through. Opposing research to advance into the solar system is probably one of the dumbest things I've ever seen someone affiliated with OWS do. Just look at all the things we take for granted these days that were either invented for the purpose of or invented due to the Apollo missions. The very computer you're using to type out this idiotic rant was improved due to the Apollo missions.

Scientific research and the advance towards human movement in the solar system and the colonization of Mars would be such a good thing for humanity. As the great Carl Sagan said, "The surface of the Earth is the shore of the cosmic ocean, recently we've waded a little way out...and the water seems inviting."

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

good response

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (22338) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Support Move to Amend = corpoRATions are not people. That is a step in the right direction to halt runaway greed/exploitation.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

At this point, it is going to take them a quick minute.

The Federation.........it's a coming and we will have our own Enterprise.