🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Thu, 14 Mar 2024 21:55:25 UTC No. 16077886
>people genuinely believed we'd be in space by the 2000's in the late 60's
🗑️ Anonymous at Thu, 14 Mar 2024 21:57:28 UTC No. 16077891
Nobody could have predicted the Carter administration where the US was completely hollowed out culturally, economically, and morally.
Anonymous at Thu, 14 Mar 2024 22:01:56 UTC No. 16077902
Probably all those fake lunar landings. Only imbecile idiots, like the average US voter, would believe in such stupidity.
Anonymous at Thu, 14 Mar 2024 22:11:53 UTC No. 16077918
>>16077886
If only we didn't support blacks.
>>16077902
>>>/x/
Anonymous at Thu, 14 Mar 2024 23:38:33 UTC No. 16078140
>>16077886
what we're doing now could've easily been done in the 2000's
Anonymous at Thu, 14 Mar 2024 23:40:52 UTC No. 16078155
>>16077886
Enjoy infinite spic nig cycle instead, what a good trade
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 04:58:09 UTC No. 16078625
>>16077886
We were in space by the 2000s, the ISS was built in the 90s.
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 05:36:39 UTC No. 16078683
>>16078625
>>16077886
>Ackcshually we were in space by the 90s
Are you forgetting we landed on the moon in fucking 1969, a year after that movie was made? There's no reason we couldn't have had a much more advanced presence in space, even beyond the ISS, and ahead of it's time. The reasons we don't are purely political.
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 05:49:27 UTC No. 16078699
>>16078683
No I didn't forget that, but we had a persistent settlement in space by the 2000s, so people from the 60s who genuinely believed there would be people living in space by the 2000s were correct even if you don't think it happened quickly enough.
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 06:28:25 UTC No. 16078729
>>16077886
ranking 2001's future in terms of plausibility:
>lunar shuttle with 1200s ISP monoatomic hydrogen NTR engines
totally feasible by the 1990s, a low-pressure NTR could likely have exceeded that performance.
>two-stage LEO spaceplane with airliner-like reusability
borderline feasible, a second-generation spaceplane which learned the lessons of the shuttle likely would have been capable of same-day reflight by 2001
>gigantic multi-kiloton rotating space station and massive underground lunar base
barely feasible, would have required a massive fully reusable launcher like the boeing space freighter to have been available by the early 1990s
>hal 9000
borderline feasible in 2024, not feasible in 2001
>gas core NTR on the discovery with 3000s+ ISP
not feasible even today, although an orion drive could have given you equivalent performance
>crew hibernation
not feasible even today
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 15:08:24 UTC No. 16079247
>>16078683
No, the reasons are economical. You're just suggesting we tax (steal) from people to pay for space stuff. A far better thing would be to stop taxing people altogether so the economy can grow quicker. Eventually the economy growing (really just an expression of the efficiency of labor) will make space travel cheap enough that people do it voluntarily.
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 15:10:54 UTC No. 16079253
>>16077886
but we are in space
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 15:12:26 UTC No. 16079257
>>16078683
Waste of money
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 16:04:46 UTC No. 16079353
>>16077886
It seems possible at the time because they hadn't realized yet that the race-communism laws they passed a few years prior would destroy all the systems necessary to make it happen.
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 16:18:45 UTC No. 16079374
You can lame paying for niggers and the 3rd world in general, capitalism, Jews, etc. The simple, boring reality is that it was just hype. Just like people thought we’d have self-driving cars by now and that there’ll be Skynet in 10 years, or that we’d be able to genetically engineer everyone into 140 IQ supermen, flying cars, drone deliveries, supersonic air travel, maglev super trains, cold cushion, space elevators, power-beaming, etc etc etc and so on. The reality is that we’re at or near the end of technical innovation. We’re running up against limits of physics. The closer we push it to the edge, the expensive / difficulty goes up disproportionately and puts a soft-ceiling on every endeavor even if it’s technically possible to go further. The future 1000 years from now may not look very different from where we are at today.
A particle acts the way a particle acts, and that’s all there is to it. Sorry.