Promoting the concept

[moonus111]

I've given a lot of thought to the subject matter discussed here and the gap is quite obvious. The ideas are sound, the only problem is that they lack a voice. The layman doesn't know that there is a possible solution for global warming (if it is true). He also doesn't know what comfort could be brought to his life by any plan to take advantage of materials and energy in space. This identifies the problem as a marketing/promotion problem.

I've read enough about how, why is the question I want to answer. I think there is enough justification to convince people all that has to happen is that someone(s) need to attempt to tell others about it. Once the knowlege that there are significant resources in the sky is a part of the public conciousness there will be no stopping us.

This leads me to the subject of this thread. Why so much info on the potential projects, and no justification on why? No promoting the solution to non-nerds/enthusiasts.

[Rhyshaelkan]

If you read my PERMANENT bonds and shares thread, we have discussed some avenues of promotion. In addition, Mark has been trying for years to promote PERMANENT. So it is not that there is no effort towards promotion.

Having a wiki(talked about elsewhere here), so that when someone wants to look up information on space ventures, gets linked to PERMANENT's wiki is not a bad idea either.

Convincing the masses is an hope on which I have given up. Mass-media clouds the minds into apathy.

However, once again talked about in the 'bonds and shares' thread, if we were to focus geeks and space-supporters and associates of geeks and space-supporters. We could possibly raise revenue for those first missions which will not return a profit.

I share your frustration in that we have the means to make it all possible. Yet no one sees the greater good. They only want to hear a "ca-ching".

[RaresH]

That is a great point Moonus and I think most of us has thought about this. I consider myself a layman, but one with a little more understanding of the importance of what PERMANENT stands for. I think it's unproductive to separate myself from everyone else and imagine I have this great responsibility to help teach the 'unlearned'. The moment you let yourself have an air of elitism, you've lost the potential to convince the greater number of people the importance of what we're doing before you've even started. The only people that will be convinced and take you seriously then will be the enthusiasts, and we are a small bunch. Any tool is useful, ethical of course, if it means most people understand the importance of space in our near future.

[moonus111]

In regard to the layman, he is the gate keeper. Any plan to take to the moon has financial merit today, only most of us that think about space, think about it through the prism of NASA's philosophy to explore (not utilize). This leaves out a fundamental concept that is etched in history; to seek out and exploit resources once discovered. In the last century there was no justifiable reason for going to the moon as there was plenty of cheap energy on earth, and seemingly limitless recourses. Today environmentalism (for good or bad) combined with increased demand from developing countries is stretching the plentiful resources to their limit. It is not hard to convince anyone today that energy is a problem, and not a stretch that the moon has the potential to solve it.

The whole reason I became an aerospace engineer was because of this website and a few others. After years of trying to deal with the dream of mankind taking to the stars, trying to push it aside like the rest of us, I've finally realized that the problem is a disconnect between those who see the potential and those who don’t know. Condensing the truths here into easy to deal with concepts is the only way to get the point across. Dollars and cents dictates that we must eventually go there, common sense says that eve is just around the corner, all that we have to do is spread the word about WHY and not HOW. Those interested will read up and discover it is very possible…

I know that PERMANENT is about all near earth objects, but I think the moon is the most important object. It can solve energy woes, and many other woes. It can prove to be the New "New World” and act as a boon for the global economy in the same way that America did for hundreds of years after its discovery.

As for unity, I think there are more that know about the concept than we know.

[joertexas]

In regard to the layman, he is the gate keeper. Any plan to take to the moon has financial merit today, only most of us that think about space, think about it through the prism of NASA's philosophy to explore (not utilize). This leaves out a fundamental concept that is etched in history; to seek out and exploit resources once discovered. In the last century there was no justifiable reason for going to the moon as there was plenty of cheap energy on earth, and seemingly limitless recourses. Today environmentalism (for good or bad) combined with increased demand from developing countries is stretching the plentiful resources to their limit. It is not hard to convince anyone today that energy is a problem, and not a stretch that the moon has the potential to solve it.

The whole reason I became an aerospace engineer was because of this website and a few others. After years of trying to deal with the dream of mankind taking to the stars, trying to push it aside like the rest of us, I've finally realized that the problem is a disconnect between those who see the potential and those who don’t know. Condensing the truths here into easy to deal with concepts is the only way to get the point across. Dollars and cents dictates that we must eventually go there, common sense says that eve is just around the corner, all that we have to do is spread the word about WHY and not HOW. Those interested will read up and discover it is very possible…

I know that PERMANENT is about all near earth objects, but I think the moon is the most important object. It can solve energy woes, and many other woes. It can prove to be the New "New World” and act as a boon for the global economy in the same way that America did for hundreds of years after its discovery.

As for unity, I think there are more that know about the concept than we know.

I think that a successful manned asteroid mining mission will go a long way toward turning the tide of public opinion. Of course, a successful manned Mars mission will do even more, but first things first...

JR

[moonus111]

It is my opinion that the moon is much more important than anything else. After reading a lot of the threads on this forum it appears that there are 3 schools of thought Moon-Mars-Roids.

-Mars is for the press, and there's a lot of hype!
-Moon is for old schoolers, and is now starting to become viable
-Asteroids are the jack, the wild card

So maybe we should all declare what army we are a part of?!? RED BLUE or WHITE, although I'm not sure which one would be blue and which one would be white....

I've always considered mars a pipe dream without the moon. For a long time I thought asteroids were IT, then I went to college and learned about the practicality of the whole thing... The moon can make mars and asteroids more possible. What the moon allows for is a manufacturing base for building ships that can ferry cargo/people between interplanetary bodies. This has the effect of eliminating the need to launch a ship from earth. Given that launching is an extremely expensive endeavor I doubt that asteroids can viably be mined without this manufacturing base to build vehicles for the task.

As for public opinion, if we tell them there is a solution for the economy, and for the energy problems, and for the environment, and there's loads of other good things about it then all it takes is getting the word out... then when the idea has market share it'll become apparent that politicians need to stop meddling with NASA and get them on the task.

-Logan Knox

[joertexas]

It is my opinion that the moon is much more important than anything else. After reading a lot of the threads on this forum it appears that there are 3 schools of thought Moon-Mars-Roids.

-Mars is for the press, and there's a lot of hype!
-Moon is for old schoolers, and is now starting to become viable
-Asteroids are the jack, the wild card

So maybe we should all declare what army we are a part of?!? RED BLUE or WHITE, although I'm not sure which one would be blue and which one would be white....

I've always considered mars a pipe dream without the moon. For a long time I thought asteroids were IT, then I went to college and learned about the practicality of the whole thing... The moon can make mars and asteroids more possible. What the moon allows for is a manufacturing base for building ships that can ferry cargo/people between interplanetary bodies. This has the effect of eliminating the need to launch a ship from earth. Given that launching is an extremely expensive endeavor I doubt that asteroids can viably be mined without this manufacturing base to build vehicles for the task.

As for public opinion, if we tell them there is a solution for the economy, and for the energy problems, and for the environment, and there's loads of other good things about it then all it takes is getting the word out... then when the idea has market share it'll become apparent that politicians need to stop meddling with NASA and get them on the task.

-Logan Knox

I support asteroid mining as a first step because asteroids are the most accessible resource using our current technology. The moon and Mars are both worthwhile destinations, but they each require more equipment than an asteroid mission will require. And again, I'm speaking about first steps, not long term plans.

JR

[Sam Fraser]

Great thread so far, guys. :) What's the first step in raising awareness? If we can actually nut something out and break it down into small manageable tasks or steps each of us could work on a little every day, we could actually get somewhere. A few enthusiastic guys here have already taken on projects like building a 3D model of an NEO probe or creating a NEO database, but these might still be too much for one person. It's all too easy (and only natural) to procrastinate on starting something or to lose momentum once started, because you find it too overwhelming or feel you're operating pretty much on your own with no support.

[Rhyshaelkan]

It is my opinion that the moon is much more important than anything else. After reading a lot of the threads on this forum it appears that there are 3 schools of thought Moon-Mars-Roids.

-Mars is for the press, and there's a lot of hype!
-Moon is for old schoolers, and is now starting to become viable
-Asteroids are the jack, the wild card

-Logan Knox

I must say I am in favor of Moon - 'roids - Mars.

Moon to build up the industry; and provide salable good in the form of SPSs, lunar astronomy, launches for sale directly from Luna.

'Roids to fuel any astro-construction project you could possibly imagine.

Mars for on-going colonization and terra-forming.

Venus for on-going, and creative, terra-forming.

However many of these are more to 'do it!' than really to make money. Again my view is not minimalist but, more is better.

[Sam Fraser]

I see PERMANENT's role as selling shovels to gold miners. Hence, moon and NEOs to produce products and services to anyone, private or public, who has a space project in mind, whether it's a private L5 colony or a public Mars mission. (Of course, providing goods and services to Earth will be vital first.) Mars itself isn't a vital stepping stone to space resource development as I (and PERMANENT) foresee it. It's mainly the distance to Mars and the gravity well that I find showstoppers in the short term. (If Phobos was found (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phobos-Grunt) to be water-rich, that might change things. Maybe.) Water ice at the lunar poles and permanently lit and shaded areas areas right next to each other makes the moon more favourable as the first stop. This assumes whatever the moon lacks can be launched "cheaply" from Earth using a "Super Aquarius (http://www.forumlog.com/nanobiotechnologyspace/showthread.php?t=348)" system, which may or may not be the case. Of course, a small low-delta-V NEO rich in volatiles or PGMs that can be captured into an Earth orbit might be discovered in the mean time, but we have to go with what we know.

[moonus111]

Any trade between the moon and earth will be driven by energy in exchange for nitrogen, hydrogen, carbon, and oxygen. Less emphasis on the oxygen. Basically fertilizer for energy. Mars cannot be reached without a base on the moon for constructing interplanetary ships.

Back on message though; the message this website has to offer can change the world today. The political landscape would look a lot different with this viable plan to save the environment and the economy. I think simply telling people in a conversation (Word of Mouth) can help. BUT, Simply spreading the word "we know how to save the world" is not enough though. We need a piece of the public thought. When the bobble heads get the issue then it WILL happen, and we can make money then. Politicians, Anchors, Leaders... the dimmest among us need to hear it from people daily.

I'm an Engineer, but I wish right now I was a marketing guru because this idea sells itself.