Jeff Greason reviews Deudney’s anti-space screed. He is the opposite of impressed.
10 thoughts on “Dark Skies”
Ultimately, the whole “dark skies” thing is about defending what is essentially a hobby for a very small number of people. It is shameful the way some “astronomers’ make claims about Starlink by showing time lapse photographs. I have a number of friends who are in the International Occultation Timing Association (IOTA! See how clever they aree?), who believe they are doing meaningful science with their toy telescopes. I have other friends who make false color astrophotographs and undertstand they are making art. I have one friend who is a science journalist (has an engineering degree from Cal Tech) and who I ran through some basic math (about all I can do) to show how the “problem” is invented.
Everyone should be anti-space. It’s bigness mocks us and tempts us to wickedly ambitious things. 640 square feet is enough for anyone. We shouldn’t think about what’s over the fence, much less millions of light years away!
More seriously, there is a profound ignorance here more dangerous than the threats he worries about. Let’s consider an analogy. Suppose you have a tent which you can prop up with a single pole. In good, calm weather, that’s enough to keep the tent up. But tonight the wind has picked up and started to blow that pole to and from. Do you a) attribute religious importance to that single pole and spend all night trying to hold the tent up, or b) throw up a few more poles and tent pegs to stabilize your tent and get a good night’s sleep?
It is utterly insane to speak of how delicate, Earth allegedly is, and then propose to do as little about the problem as possible! Listen to the engineers not the crazy people.
Also I find it amusing how the reviews for the book veer between three viewpoints: a) it’s wonderful, erudite, etc from the shills, b) it’s a hard slog from the real people actually receptive to its ideas, and c) the dude doesn’t know much about space and hates people from the more realistic critics.
Well the guards are usually not in favor of the inmates escaping, except on Hogan’s Heroes. 🙂
One less book to check off my summer reading list.
Well a dark sky could be lots people in orbit shooting guns at the surface of planet earth.
It seems one lower the perigee by shooting bullet, in any way but forward.
So one easily hit earth by shooting backward to direction one is travelling in. Shuttle used about 90 m/s delta-v to enter earth’s atmosphere. Hitting golf balls could do it.
But pointing the gun at earth seems it might not hit Earth, but it will lower the orbit. Shooting the gun directly up away from Earth, will result in a similar result as firing directly at Earth [it might hit Earth, but will lower the orbital perigee.
I was thinking about this, because to travel a shorter distance to Mars {get there faster] from Earth, it could require a trajectory which instead of returning to Earth distance, it returns to lower orbit around the Sun.
I disagree.
It appears to me that Jeff Greason is very impressed … just not in a good way.
Earth is always going to be the place people want to go. Maybe they wont ever get close than the Moon. When the Moon is turned into a park, what will that type of park be called?
“Earth is always going to be the place people want to go. Maybe they wont ever get close than the Moon.”
Well if Bezos is right…at some point in the future we might be looking at space colonies patterned after the most attractive parts of the Earth. The ultimate suburbs if you like. More “earthlike” than Earth migh be the sell point.
Well if Bezos is right…at some point in the future we might be looking at space colonies patterned after the most attractive parts of the Earth. The ultimate suburbs if you like. More “earthlike” than Earth migh be the sell point.
Great! Can’t wait to move out to my space suburb and fire up my charcoal grill for streaks and bbq chicken!
Ultimately, the whole “dark skies” thing is about defending what is essentially a hobby for a very small number of people. It is shameful the way some “astronomers’ make claims about Starlink by showing time lapse photographs. I have a number of friends who are in the International Occultation Timing Association (IOTA! See how clever they aree?), who believe they are doing meaningful science with their toy telescopes. I have other friends who make false color astrophotographs and undertstand they are making art. I have one friend who is a science journalist (has an engineering degree from Cal Tech) and who I ran through some basic math (about all I can do) to show how the “problem” is invented.
Everyone should be anti-space. It’s bigness mocks us and tempts us to wickedly ambitious things. 640 square feet is enough for anyone. We shouldn’t think about what’s over the fence, much less millions of light years away!
More seriously, there is a profound ignorance here more dangerous than the threats he worries about. Let’s consider an analogy. Suppose you have a tent which you can prop up with a single pole. In good, calm weather, that’s enough to keep the tent up. But tonight the wind has picked up and started to blow that pole to and from. Do you a) attribute religious importance to that single pole and spend all night trying to hold the tent up, or b) throw up a few more poles and tent pegs to stabilize your tent and get a good night’s sleep?
It is utterly insane to speak of how delicate, Earth allegedly is, and then propose to do as little about the problem as possible! Listen to the engineers not the crazy people.
Also I find it amusing how the reviews for the book veer between three viewpoints: a) it’s wonderful, erudite, etc from the shills, b) it’s a hard slog from the real people actually receptive to its ideas, and c) the dude doesn’t know much about space and hates people from the more realistic critics.
Well the guards are usually not in favor of the inmates escaping, except on Hogan’s Heroes. 🙂
One less book to check off my summer reading list.
Well a dark sky could be lots people in orbit shooting guns at the surface of planet earth.
It seems one lower the perigee by shooting bullet, in any way but forward.
So one easily hit earth by shooting backward to direction one is travelling in. Shuttle used about 90 m/s delta-v to enter earth’s atmosphere. Hitting golf balls could do it.
But pointing the gun at earth seems it might not hit Earth, but it will lower the orbit. Shooting the gun directly up away from Earth, will result in a similar result as firing directly at Earth [it might hit Earth, but will lower the orbital perigee.
I was thinking about this, because to travel a shorter distance to Mars {get there faster] from Earth, it could require a trajectory which instead of returning to Earth distance, it returns to lower orbit around the Sun.
I disagree.
It appears to me that Jeff Greason is very impressed … just not in a good way.
Earth is always going to be the place people want to go. Maybe they wont ever get close than the Moon. When the Moon is turned into a park, what will that type of park be called?
“Earth is always going to be the place people want to go. Maybe they wont ever get close than the Moon.”
Well if Bezos is right…at some point in the future we might be looking at space colonies patterned after the most attractive parts of the Earth. The ultimate suburbs if you like. More “earthlike” than Earth migh be the sell point.
Well if Bezos is right…at some point in the future we might be looking at space colonies patterned after the most attractive parts of the Earth. The ultimate suburbs if you like. More “earthlike” than Earth migh be the sell point.
Great! Can’t wait to move out to my space suburb and fire up my charcoal grill for streaks and bbq chicken!