Why not use terminally ill patients as Astronauts ??, page 2

Pages: << 1 2 3 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 3 times

reply posted on 10-8-2012 @ 06:30 AM by seabhac-rua

reply to post by Rock Ape

There's loads of reason why we shouldn't do something like that, the main one being that the rigors of space flight demand a certain level of fitness.

Sure, it would be nice to grant an unfortunate person their dying wish to traverse space but that's all it would be, granting a dying wish.

In a sense "we all got it comin' kid", some sooner than others, but that doesn't mean we should be trying to explore space with sick people because nobody else wants to take the risk.

reply posted on 10-8-2012 @ 06:41 AM by PW229

Originally posted by chaztekno
Or you could send the UK's Conservative Government, there half dead already, and noone wants them back

I would quite happily take an increase in my taxes to fund such a program! As long as they take that buffoon Boris with them as well.

To the OP: M8, with all due respect. Sometimes things said in the pub should STAY in the pub

reply posted on 10-8-2012 @ 06:41 AM by davidmann

This is about as thoughtful of an idea as the 'Is it a good idea to carry a fake weapon' thread.
Even a headache would impair an astronauts ability to function, even were he sitting on the throne, on earth.

30 seconds...wasted. No wonder I don't drink.

edit on 10-8-2012 by davidmann because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 10-8-2012 @ 06:41 AM by woodwytch

Originally posted by Rock Ape
So once again in the bar drinking with friends, we started talking about Mars and the planets, after hearing about Curiousity's safe landing. And that got me thinking using drunk logic...

Why not use Volunteer, Terminally ill patients as Astronauts to Mars and maybe the moons of Jupiter/Saturn.
You'd save a fortune as you'd not have to bring them back. Just pack the ship full of the meds they need and fire them off into space.

I know if I was dying of say cancer and had a year left to go, I'd be more than happy to volunteer to be the first man on Mars and die there.

I'd like to hear your thoughts on this, practical, ethical, and any other big words ending in 'ical'.

Peace

Rock Ape

Oh dear

This is a prime example of why 'drunk logic' should never leave the bar/pub.

Woody

reply posted on 10-8-2012 @ 06:57 AM by OmegaLogos

Originally posted by humphreysjim

Originally posted by OmegaLogos

What don't you understand about the term volunteer?

I'm sure we could get people with mental disabilities to volunteer, we just have to offer them candy at the end of it.

Explanation: Uhmmm?

Consent is a legal term and I think you may find that terminally mentally disabled volunteers don't have the LEGAL capacity to give consent!

Personal Disclosure:

reply posted on 10-8-2012 @ 07:07 AM by humphreysjim

Originally posted by OmegaLogos
Consent is a legal term and I think you may find that terminally mentally disabled volunteers don't have the LEGAL capacity to give consent!

I'll fight you in court, man!

reply posted on 10-8-2012 @ 07:46 AM by rocket88

reply to post by Rock Ape

Why use ill people?

There are hundreds of healthy and skilled volunteers waiting to start the trip to mars.
They don´t care about their return.

I´m sure we could find at least one person even here on ATS that would immediately get in the shuttle to mars knowing he/she would never return.

reply posted on 10-8-2012 @ 07:58 AM by stealthmonkey

reply to post by Rock Ape

ill put that on my bucket list

reply posted on 10-8-2012 @ 08:11 AM by OmegaLogos

reply to post by rocket88

Explanation: Starred!

From the point of view of practicality I fully agree!

But I think that if we think OUTSIDE the very small box of chemical powered rockets and think bigger ... WAY BIGGER! ... Then we can safely include ANYBODY, healthy or not, to go into space and live and work there if they choose to do so.

Personal Disclosure: Project Orion (nuclear detonation propulsion) was 4000 metric tons and had a crew of 150.

We could easily include modern Ion rockets and not just coast like we do now but actually CRUISE at 1g and thereby artificially create a gravity environment inside the massive ship. Find all this info in the thread I authored and linked to in my post on pg1 of this thread.

reply posted on 10-8-2012 @ 08:23 AM by luciddream

I would do it in full health. Just to die among stars and other planets!

Even if its just a 10 sec worth of view on another planet!

reply posted on 10-8-2012 @ 12:04 PM by PurpleVortex

Wow. My IQ just dropped big time by just reading the title. Really? Which part of terminally ill don't you understand?
Mind=Blown

reply posted on 10-8-2012 @ 12:20 PM by mikeyb1313

reply to post by caitlinfae

this is the most ridiculous thing you've read on this site? someone attempting a practical post?

honey, you must not read this site much.

reply posted on 10-8-2012 @ 12:26 PM by Atzil321

Why not use terminally ill patients as Astronauts ??,

Because the idea is morally repugnant...

reply posted on 10-8-2012 @ 12:31 PM by Atzil321

reply to post by luciddream

I doubt you would feel the same way when reality kicked in.... A lonely, lingering and painful death.

reply posted on 10-8-2012 @ 12:42 PM by caladonea

reply to post by Rock Ape

A person has to go through rigorous training to be an Astronaut; and I think the majority of terminally ill people would not be able to go through all of the training.

Also I think the majority of terminally ill people would want to stay on Earth and be with their families and friends.

reply posted on 10-8-2012 @ 12:44 PM by caitlinfae

reply to post by mikeyb1313

A practical post? A practical joke more like. I read this site plenty, and am kinda picky about what I read.....how I managed to click on this one is beyond me. I was looking at it from a purely human and compassionate point of view, so forgive me for that. I'm also stunned at the op's lack or knowledge or insight or both of what terminally ill might mean. Even allowing for being totally hammered down the pub with his mates, surely he should have more sense than to actually voice these opinions in public?

reply posted on 10-8-2012 @ 12:59 PM by Miccey

LOLs at all the turd comments...

I think its a good idea..

"In vino Veritas" dude...

I work in helthcare and see LOTS of terminaly ill patients.
Some in verry bad condition some not..Some that maybe
have 2-3 years left...I often hear the coment "I wanna go
with a bang"...( would be a hell of bang ) We actually
have ppl with dialysis treating them selfs...So whats
the big deal...

The deathrow idea is as good actually...What ppl have
more time to spend fiting up their bodys..DANG...+
You give them a purpous plus a way to payback.
(I know a murderer cant pay back but hey, you will never
see him again..)....

Pleas someone coment on this...NO not bull#, actually coment....

reply posted on 10-8-2012 @ 01:08 PM by flexy123

This thread makes it sound there is a problem finding volunteers for Mars, even if it's only a one-way trip.

REALITY is, there are already volunteers lined up right now which would be eager to go to Mars and form a colony, sometimes in the future.

reply posted on 10-8-2012 @ 01:49 PM by PhoenixOD

Its much more difficult to send humans into space even if they are only going one way.

reply posted on 10-8-2012 @ 04:16 PM by Jcal84

reply to post by Rock Ape

I know everybody is hammering on the OP but I remember seeing a space exploration documentary on Science Channel that kind of alluded to to something similar. They were talking about using Astronauts in their 50s or older so the long term effects of cosmic radiation wouldn't have as dire consequences as it would to a younger person?

I know it's not the same thing but it is still using somebody that has less time to live?

Pages: << 1 2 3 >> ^^TOP^^