With 'Off-Planet' Mining Bill, US Congress Seeks to Privatize Outer Space

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

Really? There is intelligent life in the solar system and we missed it? What planet/moon are they on?

Do you know for a fact that there isn't?

originally posted by: NthOther
Do you know for a fact that there isn't?

Yes, I do, and so does any other sane person.

originally posted by: projectvxn

You're the one that believes we have exploitable labor in space man..Not me.

That is not at all what I said. I'm saying that you don't know. Nor do I. But if there was, it is not any stretch at all to assume that humanity would exploit it, if possible.

It is a predictable pattern.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Since when did reckless arrogance predict sanity?

I don't care if private business owns an asteroid or even a bigger rock. I really think mining asteroids is a good idea, if can be pulled off.

originally posted by: intrptr

Private profit with public funding.

Chomping at bit to get the gold and have someone else pay for it.

Correct, the tax payers have paid a boatload for space research only to have "private" hands come along and reap the rewards. And I say private loosely because we know the ones that will get first dibs will be the cronies in bed with politicians.

Also, no doubt the tax payers will be on the hook to subsidize these "private" cronies further.

a reply to: FyreByrd

Yup, one step further to potentially saving our species and people go bananas over the 'cost' of it all.
Maybe if we started automating more jobs, made money obsolete, and concentrated on well being, saving our planet, space exploration, medical science, etc people will start to understand that going outside our planet is exactly what we need.

I am all for this, sign me up for a space mining job!

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: NthOther
Do you know for a fact that there isn't?

Yes, I do, and so does any other sane person.

Really? Even after all the released and formerly top secret documents stating the contrary, that unknown species of humanoid life are here in our solar system, sometimes crashing, interfering with nuclear missile launch codes and functions, and doing so in many documented instances of interfering with most every military installation on the planet, you categorically state that you know for certain and they aren't here?

You also gave away the reason you are making this claim. "Sanity" Every "sane" person. You grouped every sane person with yourself as a defensive measure so that nobody thinks you are crazy if you "believed" otherwise.

This was, and still is the current goal and strategy of the US military to discredit and ridicule anyone who asks too many questions regarding alien life and if it is currently coming here.

And I 'm not saying this is a bad thing for you to do, because if you resist what the military counter intelligence agendas and programs want you to believe, and speak out publicly about it in any effective way, they will target you and will be discrediting you and anyone else who does that. They have done it many thousands of times already.

You could lose your job, lose your family, and lose your own life, depending how effective you were at presenting evidence that is contrary to what the military's own goals and missions are, in respect to UFO's and alien visitors currently visiting our solar system.

The people who have seen non-human craft and technology, and creatures, already DO know that they are coming here now, and many of them already know what happens when they tell others, and speak out publicly about what they know. They are classified as "insane crazy people"

It isn't good for a Résumé, that is for certain.

If you have never personally seen non human technology or creatures that "shouldn't" be here, then you can say you don't know. But you can't say it as a statement of fact that they are not here, just because "sane" people will agree with you.

originally posted by: NthOther

originally posted by: schuyler

So who are going to enslave out there? What "native population" are you referring to? How is your comparison at all valid?

Point being, humanity has yet to shed its conquer-and-exploit mentality. Until we do that, we really have no business running around filing claims in space.

Do you not see the the parallel? History repeats itself. Of course we'd all like to think that we've "progressed" above and beyond the horrors of colonialism, but that simply is not the case. I see no evidence of it.

Of course I see "the parallel," such that it is, but it's inherently weak. Mining asteroids is hardly on the same scale as enslaving a population of sentient beings or even a living planet. Taking such a moralistic tone about mining asteroids is not going to move the populace to protest the practice. We DO have "business" filing claims in space, and we will. It's already being codified into law.

originally posted by: NthOther

originally posted by: projectvxn

You're the one that believes we have exploitable labor in space man..Not me.

That is not at all what I said. I'm saying that you don't know. Nor do I. But if there was, it is not any stretch at all to assume that humanity would exploit it, if possible.

It is a predictable pattern.

Moral objections to things that aren't going to happen.

Aren't there college tuition protests you should be at?

originally posted by: projectvxn

originally posted by: NthOther

originally posted by: projectvxn

You're the one that believes we have exploitable labor in space man..Not me.

That is not at all what I said. I'm saying that you don't know. Nor do I. But if there was, it is not any stretch at all to assume that humanity would exploit it, if possible.

It is a predictable pattern.

Moral objections to things that aren't going to happen.

Aren't there college tuition protests you should be at?

What isn't going to happen? Asteroid mining?
Probably it isn't going to happen anytime soon using our non classified space program. The other one probably doesn't need to mine asteroids anymore.

They can legislate whatever they like it will be meaningless.
off planet is in effect the new wild west if you can stick a flag in it you can claim it
until someone else takes it off you with force.

the day we perfect a viable commercial space craft capable off carrying a useful quantity
of material and personnel for mining or otherwise exploiting the rest of our solar system is the day
gold rush mentality returns.

I wonder how far we would have to travel in order to obtain more fuel in space?

How far is the nearest obtainable fuels and ore?

I hear there are some alcohol comets out there.

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: projectvxn

originally posted by: NthOther

originally posted by: projectvxn

You're the one that believes we have exploitable labor in space man..Not me.

That is not at all what I said. I'm saying that you don't know. Nor do I. But if there was, it is not any stretch at all to assume that humanity would exploit it, if possible.

It is a predictable pattern.

Moral objections to things that aren't going to happen.

Aren't there college tuition protests you should be at?

What isn't going to happen? Asteroid mining?
Probably it isn't going to happen anytime soon using our non classified space program. The other one probably doesn't need to mine asteroids anymore.

No. Moral objections to "exploiting" other species on asteroids that do not exist. Nth would have us believe that we are arrogant for assuming there are no sentient species on the asteroids to exploit, or other planets in the solar system because, you know, there MIGHT be, living in caves on Mars or wherever, and IF there are, then we WOULD exploit them, which he thinks is morally objectionable. Therefore we shouldn't be making laws about mining claims on asteroids.

Certainly imaginative, but a bit of a s t r e t c h.

a reply to: schuyler

Ah I see

I'm not so sure there isn't someone else out there now, on comets and such, although I know it sounds ludicrous. I used photo zoom pro using "Lanczos" algorithm to enlarge an image of the Rosetta comet without adding incorrect pixels, and after doing so, it surely looks like someone is already doing some mining there. Of course saying such a thing like I am guarantees I won't be getting any awards from the "Society of space Archeologists" any time soon...

As far as exploiting someone else if they are already out there, they probably have a million years worth of advanced "anti--exploitation weaponry" Set on automatic defense mode, so I'm sure that would put a long term halt on mining just any old rock in our interstellar space. And as far as exploiting other intelligent species, they probably would just laugh at the idea that humans are coming.

The Russian cosmonauts that went public when their phobos missions were "interfered" with would probably agree. All conjecture on my part, I know. It is fun to think about though.

originally posted by: darkbake

originally posted by: FyreByrd
Mining of any type, anywhere does horrible damage to life.

Mining in outer space doesn't do massive damage to life, actually. I think mining operations in outer space are the way to go. There are apparently even naturally occurring petroleum deposits on other planets / moons in our solar system. This has major implications for our future in space - if nations aren't allowed to own anything in space but corporations are, the long-term potential is for corporations to eventually make nations obsolete.

Mobile suit gundam here we come.
I seem to remember a certain corporation on the Luna colony declaring independence and declaring the moon their territory. Hail Zeon!! lol.

originally posted by: schuyler

No. Moral objections to "exploiting" other species on asteroids that do not exist. Nth would have us believe that we are arrogant for assuming there are no sentient species on the asteroids to exploit, or other planets in the solar system because, you know, there MIGHT be, living in caves on Mars or wherever, and IF there are, then we WOULD exploit them, which he thinks is morally objectionable. Therefore we shouldn't be making laws about mining claims on asteroids.

Certainly imaginative, but a bit of a s t r e t c h.

Why is it so hard to at least consider the possibility? They've found organic compounds on comets. They speculate that Europa may be teeming with life, as we recognize it, under the surface because the conditions necessary for life (as we recognize it) are presumed to exist there. It is no stretch at all.

But what about life as we don't recognize it? What if there are other forms of life that are not carbon based? We wouldn't even know what to look for, and if we found it, how would we even know if it was "sentient" (not that sentience really matters--we don't need to be deforesting Rigel IV, either)?

There could be sentient microbial life in the upper atmosphere of Saturn and we would be completely ignorant to the fact.

But science, as far as it has developed, says there isn't.

And, of course, we all know that scientific fact is authoritative and static, never being revised to reflect new discoveries or new understanding.

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: FyreByrd

4. What would be the consequences of bringing back those resources to Terra. Short term I don't think it would be much but long term would it change the mass of the planet.

5. Mostly I don't see much thought to any of the potential negative consequences only the hope of consentrated pofit for the few.

The article only discusses the first point - well part of my first point.

After writing a bit - my initial assesment is that it would be foolhardly to EXPECT this to be of help due to increased (massive) use of planetary resources and damage to the bioshpere that such an undertaking would require to be of practical use until we have the will and means to do so without added pollution. Mining of any type, anywhere does horrible damage to life.

We add about 5,600 million kgs (ave 70kgs p/person) every year through Population growth; and you worry about changing the mass of the planet?

"mining damages life"? what, in a vacuum in outer space - I really don't see what you're fussing about?

Think about what you said. All the new 'beings' are created using 'earth' stuff and is compensated for by death and extinction. You are not adding 'mass' to the planet when new people are born - just converting existing planetary mass from one form to another.

originally posted by: FyreByrd

Short term I don't think it would be much but long term would it change the mass of the planet.

Mining of any type, anywhere does horrible damage to life.

There is no life on the Moon or the asteroids - but you probably didn't see the memo....as to increasing the mass of Earth over time, well 60 tons of space dust falls on Earth every DAY.....

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: FyreByrd

And just how are the corporations going to build the infratstruture necessary for such a 'boon' without making Mother Earth uninhabitable?

The raw materials necessary for this will not make Earth uninhabitable. Please point somewhere, cite something, that clearly states this. Otherwise is just hyperbolic nonsense.

The rest of the post isn't even worth responding to. Please educate yourself on these matters before continuing to embarrass yourself with such hyperbole.

While it may be somewhat hyperbolic my statement is hardly nonsence it's a logical inference from the behavior of humankind over the last couple of centuries. In our 'throw-a-away' society we have already depleted many valueable resources including minerals that cannot be 'renewed'. The scope of creating a 'practical' space mining system would consume the majority of the remaining mineral resources of the planet. Three-Dee printing (plastic - oil based remember) isn't going to built the spacecraft, the mining equipment, the launch and landing facilities and who knows what else. Unless everything is built or derived from recycled goods or easily renewals resources, it just isn't possible to do without making the planet uninhabitable in any way you or I would want to experience.