mcjohnjohn

懵仔，要地球資源耗盡嘅話，首先人類都要捱過咗氣候轉變所帶來嘅後遺症啦？你不如話叫依家嘅國家領導人預先 ...
Lik 發表於 2010-10-5 16:58

細佬力, 你用一個人既觀點(未生仔就安排定點樣同佢嚮變度買棺材山地), 去比較一個國家既觀點(探月計劃), 未免係風馬牛不相及.

有抱負d 咁睇, 探索太空係人類一件重要既事, 中國身為一個大國, 點都應該o係呢一方面去一分身. 自私d 咁睇, 人地美俄都有能力探月, 中國要證明都有呢個科技, 先至可以同佢地相題並論. 唔通比美俄壟斷太空科技先至係正確?

小弟覺得太空一定要繼續探索, 內政都一定要做好, 咁先至係一個負責任, 有擔帶既真正強國.

-- 契哥 MJJ

mcjohnjohn

懵仔，要地球資源耗盡嘅話，首先人類都要捱過咗氣候轉變所帶來嘅後遺症啦？你不如話叫依家嘅國家領導人預先 ...
Lik 發表於 2010-10-5 16:58

仲有, 回應係"多狗餘... 呢啲叫做未學生先學走，識唔識阿你？"呢句.
中國o係航天科技已經成熟, 而家發射一個探月衛星, 絕對係能力範圍內, 唔存在有未學行先學走.
當然, 如果你話中國內部大把野未搞得好, 唔應該花錢去航天科技, 呢個講法都未尚不可. 不過, 如果要等一切都settle 起來(行)先去研發一樣新事物(走), 咁樣就會永遠落後人家.

-- 契哥 MJJ

peter236

你無病呀化？！幾多東、西方國家都無太空、航天嘅科研啦～佢地嘅生活水準唔高得過中國大陸？！

真係黐能 ...
Lik 發表於 2010-10-4 21:52

I lectured you on this before. China's space program has big economic benefits, like the GPS, weather satellites, communication satellites, geology satellites etc.

How do you find new mineral deposits? How do you make weather forecasts? All these need to be done with the help of your own satellites. Using the GPS is not free. Without your own rockets launching technologies, you will have to pay other countries to do it for you. Now China can do all these themselves and can make money from launching satellites for other countries.

China space technologies is not the most advanced or cutting edge compare with the US. China needs to just keep up for now. Like you say, if China waits for another 30 years, they would be way behind. But a moron like you will never understand this.

It was Taiwan that did not send warships to Diaoyu Island, but you dared not bash Taiwan. Taiwan has defensive agreements with the US, so Taiwan is in a better position to send in the warships. Besides, the Diaoyu Islands are under Taiwan province administration.

Lik

細佬力, 你用一個人既觀點(未生仔就安排定點樣同佢嚮變度買棺材山地), 去比較一個國家既觀點(探月計劃), 未免係風馬牛不相及.

有抱負d 咁睇, 探索太空係人類一件重要既事, 中國身為一個大國, 點都應該o係呢一方面去一分身. 自私d 咁睇, 人地美俄都有能力探月, 中國要證明都有呢個科技, 先至可以同佢地相題並論. 唔通比美俄壟斷太空科技先至係正確?

小弟覺得太空一定要繼續探索, 內政都一定要做好, 咁先至係一個負責任, 有擔帶既真正強國.
mcjohnjohn 發表於 2010-10-5 01:10

風馬牛不相及？你係唔係連咁簡單嘅比喻都唔識呀？知唔知咩叫做未學行先學走呀，死蠢？

中國大西北、山區、內陸幾多地方只會唔係一、二線城市嘅話，生活質數已經同大城差好遠，而如果你一旦再去僻少少嘅農鄉，幾多人連抽水馬桶、雪櫃都無呀！你試吓去美加啲少城鄉、鎮仔睇吓，又睇吓人地會唔會連個屎坑都無水沖？！連呢啲咁基本嘅民生野都未搞好，真係人人有個彩電就算呀？唔通等佢地可以睇住個電視，見到楊利偉話自我感覺良好就對呢啲鄉民有利？

我以前都唔會咁樣吊柒你嘅，但係今次你所講嘅野實在太賤架。你去PK啦契弟！

-力

rockypath

Immediate needs 都未搞掂就想去諗未來 900幾年之後嘅事... 你不如話未生仔就安排定點樣同佢嚮變度買棺材山地？ ...
Lik 發表於 2010-10-5 00:58

We don’t have to talk about 1000 years into the future. We just talk about NOW!

Didn’t you say China should wait until the living standard of its people somehow gets close to the current western standard before investing in developing space technologies?

I tell you this is mathematically and economically impossible bases on the current earth supply of natural resources and energy. This is an OPEN SECRET to all experts and national leaders around the world (morons like you would rather spend the effort to BS instead of enriching your knowledge).

This only requires elementary math. In order to reach the western living standard, how much natural resources and energy will be needed? How much resources and energy does the earth currently have? How many countries around the world are fighting for those scare resource and energy? Just do the math yourself.

If China leaders follow what you said, China will be doomed to live in poverty and 再次淪落百年前遭各國列強任意欺辱掠奪的田地.

Do you know what you are saying, Moron? Do you think China pay the price for the 百年恥辱 for NOTHING?

sheep

In order to reach the western living standard, how much natural resources and energy will be needed? How much resources and energy does the earth currently have? How many countries around the world are fighting for those scare resource and energy? Just do the math yourself.
rockypath 發表於 2010-10-5 09:04

點解你真係愚蠢到咁
而家消耗咁多能源
唔係改善僅中國人嘅生活
係做僅世界工廠
亦都係響度消耗僅自己中國嘅人力資源
即係廉價勞工
講你係線性思維真係無錯

BiscottiGelato

Not up to western standards, but most certainly something better than what the poor rural people cu ...
Lik 發表於 2010-10-4 15:07

It's a fine line when you want to start spending on things like aerospace vs social services. Your opinion stinks as much as everybody else's. To say China is 'wrong' in this case is merely your opinion. I think many thinks otherwise, and for very good reasons. In my opinion, I don't know if the spending on aerospace as it is currently is appropriate, as I simply don't know the numbers behind the budgeting. I do know that I don't want it to be '0'.

Return on aerospace R&D is not immediate. Once you know for sure what the return will be it will be way too late ot invest in it. There's at least a 20 years gap between US vs China in aerospace. To actually out wrestle US for any real claim for space resource, rights or technology it will be even longer than that. We cannot to afford to start only if we can quantify the return. Rest assure tho that the return will be enormous when the time comes.

BiscottiGelato

We don’t have to talk about 1000 years into the future. We just talk about NOW!

Didn’t you say  ...
rockypath 發表於 2010-10-5 09:04

Very good point. If China and India actually have it's population rise to the quality of living that western society has, the burden on the Earth's finite resource will be astronomical. We should expand our capacity through technological advancement before expanding our consumption.

There will always be inadequacy on this planet. Using this as an excuse to delay space exploration further is short-sighted, and will just mean that we will never be able to populate beyond this finite planet. It's kind of like buying insurance, the probability that you'll stop dead tomorrow is very low, but it only need to happen once and the consequences are disastorous. Same thing for the Earth and human species. We have been long overdued of an ELE (Extinction Level Event), which have been plenty numerous throughout the history of Earth. All it takes is once to put the human civilization, if not human species all together, into jeoporady. Repeating what Hawking have said, human need to escape the earth's gravity and be able to live in a seperate biosphere sooner rather than later. You never know when it's going to happen. Given the consequences, is it really justifyable to not put ANY resource at all in addressing this risk? It's only prudent policy that we invest appropriately into this risk, and it is every countries' interest to take part in it.

Aside from misconceptions put up by your favorite Hollywood movie, the worst part about space is, you can't wait until it is actually urgent before action is taken. Even if we continue to put in what we are putting in today towards this effort, I would think it will take at least 200 years or more before we can actually put up any sort of semi-permanent, self sustainable biosphere into space. Keep in mind that we have been living in the most prosperous 50 years of human history ever. All it takes is WWIII to take us all the way backwards. We should put even more resource into this direction when we can afford to and before it's too late.

BiscottiGelato

風馬牛不相及？你係唔係連咁簡單嘅比喻都唔識呀？知唔知咩叫做未學行先學走呀，死蠢？

中國大西北、山區 ...
Lik 發表於 2010-10-5 09:01

I think you need to step back and look at things objectively. If 民生大過天, then don't even talk about aerospace spending. Defense spending should go out the window too then? Again, aerospace spending is not meant to benefit the average joe, not immediately anyways. 見到楊利偉話自我感覺良好 will not be a benefit  to the 鄉民, and it's not meant to benefit the 鄉民. The knowledge and experiences gained in such missions will contribute to the country, and humanity's future. Whether it be in disaster prevention, recovery or future space resource exavation or immigration. If we don't take any small steps now, these big things down the road will never happen, or it will be too late for China as it gets monopolized by other countries.

You extreme socialist viewpoint is well observed on this forum, along with serious attitude problems involving personal attacks and offsensive remarks. Your poor temperment, and heavy (anti-Chinese gov't) bias only makes rational discussion difficult and almost pointless. With your track record of bashing almost anything and everything done by the Chinese gov't, it just makes one thinks that you can no longer assess individual issues objectively on a case by case basis.