Comments by "Zrips" (@Zripas) on "Thunderf00t"
channel.
-
I mean, TF is a grifter, but like... Hyponatremia, do you know what is it? Its water poisoning, its when you drink to much water. So, while water is essential to our survivability, if you drink to much of it you risk of actually dying. Keeping this in mind, its not an issue with CO2, its an issue with amount of it. Plants do consume CO2, but there is basic limit on how much they can. This becomes even bigger issue when you get things like expanding deserts, deforestations and so on.
Issue is with amount.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@loandbehold5178
Reason for investors would be to make money... Currently there is no financial benefit to go to Mars, Musk himself said this multiple times and this is why he is funding all of this from his own money, primarily from what Starlink will be making.
What you said was an implication that Musk wants to ruin this earth to go to Mars, which makes no sense, as this isn't the goal of mars colonization, never was and never will be, after all as bad it could get here on earth it will be better than it will be on mars from day 1. So making a sheltered colony on earth would make way more sense than to make one on Mars. Colony in a sense of building some enclosed self sustaining mega shelter in case earth's atmosphere can no longer sustain life.
If you have this idea just because Musk does it, then just say it, but to make up such silly arguments is just, well, silly.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Or, wild idea here, I know, but just give it a shot here, or you could expand that and not use lift? Maybe this one uses lift because its a semi prototype level thing and adding elevator in area where land cost is astronomical was best option? As someone with youtube channel (Liked your videos on flat earth by the way) and named it "CoolHardLogic" you didn't really used a lot of it here.
Its like TF going to hyperloop mockup years back and complaining that it wasn't built from space grade materials... Jut use some logic here.
By the way, underground tunnels are not a good idea, those can work to redirect traffic, but it's borderline on being useless, basically bunch of effort and money to maybe lower down trafic little bit, it works, but isn't worth the effort.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hddun
" What the Heck is that word"
English isn't my primary language, wasn't even secondary. And as someone claiming to be engineer fails to understand what misspelled word "engineed" should have been in this context... C'mon... I thought engineers should be smart people... I must have been wrong here.
"how do you know the revenue stream from Starlink"
Was reported to be cash flow positive last year by Gwynne Shotwell. Is there any actual reasons to not believe this? Yes its privately owned, but like, what would they benefit from saying that privately owned company is now cash flow positive while they could have kept its in negative side for quite some time with really simple excuse as its still in a deployment and so on? Starlink is in early stages, so getting it into positive numbers is generally unexpected.
"I don't know."
I can see that...
"Mr. Musk doesn't say or estimate the cost."
Because its a thing which never was done and estimating something like that would be silly. Like for example, in early days moon missions costed around 1 billion per trip, if rocket blows up you get extra billion of expenses on your hand... It's not that small of a number for event which was basically accident. With mars it's a lot worse as you have a lot longer trips involving dozens of rockets for initial colony. He is building rocket for that purpose, how much it will cost at the end, no one knows and generally not really important as long as it gets done.
" many lives and $$$HUGE were lost but no one to my view lost a manager job at NASA..."
Weird engineer you are... Not much money was lost as what you lost was just raw materials, excluding human lives. While raw materials are just a fraction of the cost. Everything else is from labor which is basically wages to the people who made money from all of this and put that money back into circulation. When it comes to government institutions it's basically money going in circles, with private companies its slightly different, but still money isn't being lost at 100% rate, it's more like 2%.
And accidents happen, no idea why NASA should have fired anyone... Rocket science is... Well... Rocket science... One small mistake in design can result in total failure, one of the reasons why NASA took ages to make anything as it could not afford accidents and had to to thousands of simulations and controlled tests before attempting actual launches, with private companies, well, you have prime example as SpaceX, they can blow up few rockets to gather data as fast as possible and improve on it with next iteration of the rocket.
"200 people marooned to die a slow death from starvation or radiation and yet no way to help them -- tragic..."
its so weird, its like you think that we will be sending people there in droves with their lunch box and nothing more... Have you seen movie "Martian"? Point is that you actually can grow your own food on Mars, initial setup will be expensive and tedious, but Mars colony can be fully self sustaining.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1