Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Tuesday January 15 2019, @01:38PM   Printer-friendly
from the seeds-of-chang'e dept.

China's Moon mission sees first seeds sprout

Seeds taken up to the Moon by China's Chang'e-4 mission have sprouted, says China National Space Administration. It marks the first time any biological matter has grown on the Moon, and is being seen as a significant step towards long-term space exploration. [...] Plants have been grown on the International Space Station before but never on the Moon.

[...] The Chinese Moon lander was carrying among its cargo soil containing cotton and potato seeds, yeast and fruit fly eggs. The plants are in a sealed container on board the lander. The crops will try to form a mini biosphere - an artificial, self-sustaining environment.

[...] On Tuesday, Chinese state media said the cotton seeds had now grown buds. The ruling Communist Party's official mouthpiece the People's Daily tweeted an image of the sprouted seed, saying it marked "the completion of humankind's first biological experiment on the Moon".

Fred Watson, Australian Astronomical Observatory's astronomer-at-large, told the BBC the development was "good news". "It suggests that there might not be insurmountable problems for astronauts in future trying to grow their own crops on the moon in a controlled environment."

According to SCMP, a similar biosphere experiment will be conducted on Earth for comparison.

A Chang'e-5 lunar exploration vehicle could be launched by the end of 2019, and would include a 2 kg sample return. At least 3 more Chang'e missions are planned.

Previously: China's Chang'e 4 Spacecraft Lands on the Far Side of the Moon
Chang'e Lander Sends Back Far Side Panorama


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @02:59PM (25 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @02:59PM (#786910)

    The Chinese Moon lander was carrying among its cargo soil containing cotton and potato seeds, yeast and fruit fly eggs. The plants are in a sealed container on board the lander. The crops will try to form a mini biosphere - an artificial, self-sustaining environment.

    Did they actually try to replicate this on earth? I tried myself a few times to bootstrap such environment in a glass jar, which failed every time. Then... 2 weeks of darkness... how are they going to keep the plants alive in those two weeks? (self-sustaining, remember) Third question... "fruit flies", really? Who in their bright mind would bring a crop pest to a place where we hope to live in the near? future?

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 4, Funny) by eravnrekaree on Tuesday January 15 2019, @03:29PM (18 children)

    by eravnrekaree (555) on Tuesday January 15 2019, @03:29PM (#786922)

    No one is living on the moon. It makes absolutely no sense and is a ridiculous and insane idea. We should prohibit funding of such ideas as they are a waste of money and resources. On the moon, temperatures vary from 127 C to -170 C.There is no air. There is only trace amounts of water. The dust is carcinogenic. It is bathed in dangerous radiation. Its retarded, stupid idea that people think is cool because of Star Trek.

    People move to Florida because its too cold up north and they want to be in a more tropical climate. Do you think people are clamoring to move to a place with -120 C temperatures, no air, no water, nada zero zilch. Are you out of your mind? The moon is not a paradise, the place is a living hell and survival there would be a fruitless and ultimately futile fight. Many people would die in the process.

    At most you could see people maybe live there for a few months until they have to come back. Its a pointless exercise and lacks any real clear purpose. It has no more value than a tightrope walk stunt, perhaps negative value because of the immense amount of resources it would drain we could better spend on earth.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @03:36PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @03:36PM (#786926)

      Glad you live in paradise, dude! So how is it in Olduvai Gorge?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @03:41PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @03:41PM (#786931)

      Such negativity. Dude, you go to Florida, and I'll go to the moon, alright? You don't have to come along with us!!

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @03:50PM (8 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @03:50PM (#786935)

      For this reason, God sends them a powerful delusion(operation of wandering)(planet) so that they will believe the lie.

      Mystery Red of the Great American Eclipse [cloudflare-ipfs.com]
      It has blood on it! [cloudflare-ipfs.com]
      ABCNews: Eclipse makes pendulum wander [archive.org]

      Lunar Eclipse this Sunday evening: Is that red light really there, in the black shadow, at the beginning of the eclipse, or is it not there, like Nat Geo, NASA, and Wash Post say?
      Nat Geo [cloudflare-ipfs.com]

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @03:54PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @03:54PM (#786938)

        CLoudflare has restricted their IPFS features for video. Here are fixed URLs.

        nat geo [wa.hle.rs]
        Mystery Red [wa.hle.rs]
        Blood on it [wa.hle.rs]

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 15 2019, @09:06PM (6 children)

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday January 15 2019, @09:06PM (#787058) Journal
        We already extensively discussed [soylentnews.org] the profound errors in whatever you're trying to claim. There's no difference in the Sun between winter and summer. There's no weirdness in lunar eclipses that somehow disprove whatever it is you are claiming these days. We're figured out when sunrises and sunsets, lunar and solar eclipses happen to great precision - which implies a reality far different that you propose. And yet you persist with gobbledygook observations about "red light really there, in the black shadow".

        Since you won't listen to reason, let's instead discuss the theological swamp on which you base your convictions. You can, of course, feel free to not listen. After all, what are the chances that God would send me to save you from your hell-bound path? Probably not likely, right? Well, moving on:

        For this reason, God sends them a powerful delusion

        Which god lies and deceives? Let's look at some select Bible verses. Of course, anyone can rationalize anything with a Bible verse. After all, you did that. But we do see some rather strong pronouncements concerning the act of lying.

        Exodus 20:16

        You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

        Proverbs 12:22

        The LORD detests lying lips, but he delights in people who are trustworthy.

        Proverbs 13:5

        The righteous hate what is false, but the wicked make themselves a stench and bring shame on themselves.

        Proverbs 14:5

        An honest witness does not deceive, but a false witness pours out lies.

        John 8:44

        You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

        The "energeian planes" is one of the more incredibly ridiculous concepts to come out of the early Church. Here's is a translation [biblegateway.com] (New King James Version) of the section (2 Thessalonians 2:5-12) that phrase comes from:

        Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

        "Energeian planes" (the subject of this thread) means "working of deception" [franknelte.net] (interpreted here as "send them strong delusion"). So why does God wish to condemn the wicked by deliberately deluding them rather than show them the truth in order to bring them to the truth? Even in the weakest interpretation possible, God is contributing to the deception even if it comes from Satan - he lies with Satan. Who again is the father of lies? Is it God or Satan?

        Here's my take. You are the worst of the blasphemers of God because you say that he would lie with great effort and consistency to his own children - about his great gift to them, this Earth and the universe - for some petty reason. You slander millions of people who worked hard either as astronomers or in the space industry to make our world a brighter place - merely because the logic of your delusions demands the disputation of those who who provide evidence contrary to the delusion. You choose to ignore the evidence of your own eyes and the knowledge that has been built up over many painstaking millennia. And you have the gall to expect us to buy into your blasphemy with feeble, vague pronouncements like the above "red light"? Is anything sacred to you?

        My view on this is that God would not do so. Nor, fortunately for you, would he be of a sort to care about your petty blasphemies and corrupt delusions. Finally, it is of little significance to us what the Moon is, be it a ball of dirt or an orbiting billboard for Satan nor Earth whether round or flat. No matter how convincingly a fake moon is presented or what shape Earth happens to be, it will not sway one person to or away from Heaven. However, creating delusions that cause us to doubt reality and ignore the consequences of wicked actions, that'd be the sort of thing that Satan would be interested in furthering.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @10:22PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @10:22PM (#787077)

          Which god?
          We have so many.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @10:34PM (4 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @10:34PM (#787084)

          God does it "For this reason." That being, those who will fall under the powerful delusion(Energeian Planes) have already "refused the love of the truth that would save them." This is a parallel to what Eve did, when she ate from the forbidden fruit of the tree of knowledge. She refused the love of the truth (God's Word, and order not to eat) and then Ate. The consequence is Knowledge, or Science.

          This is why the powerful delusion(Energeian Planes) is built-in to the universe around us. And it is also why it only has consequences for those who choose to worship Science over the Word of God. But, as it is a delusion, there are some very small seams. For as you say, God does not lie. If the physical reality was truth, it would be truth. But as delusion, it must have a failing that shows it is not Truth.

          All of this is why Satanists advance Science. And God does enable it, but each of those who fall to it have already made their spiritual choice. Similar to Romans where "God gives them up to depraved minds to do what ought not be done."

          No scientist has done wrong, and they have correctly ascertained the physical laws of reality. But it is still the tainted fruit of knowledge.

          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 16 2019, @12:07AM (3 children)

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday January 16 2019, @12:07AM (#787119) Journal

            That being, those who will fall under the powerful delusion(Energeian Planes) have already "refused the love of the truth that would save them."

            That's not what "energeian planes" means - "fall under delusion" is not the same as having the delusion imposed ("working of delusion"). But it means lies even if we do grant your version. And no choice is forever. It is very convenient for your mythology that you can arbitrarily decide that doubters have irreversibly "refused the love of the truth". I think that is one of the most dishonest tactics used by faux Christians, to claim that doubt is purely the fault of the disbeliever rather than of a fanatic who hasn't bothered to think through their beliefs or why other people belief different things.

            This is why the powerful delusion(Energeian Planes) is built-in to the universe around us. And it is also why it only has consequences for those who choose to worship Science over the Word of God. But, as it is a delusion, there are some very small seams. For as you say, God does not lie. If the physical reality was truth, it would be truth. But as delusion, it must have a failing that shows it is not Truth.

            In other words, here are two gifts of God which you spurn. He has created Earth, but you foolishly treat it as a mere delusion even to the point of seeking out imaginary flaws. He gave you the ability to learn and understand (of which science is but a small part), but you choose to treat that great gift, the second greatest gift of all, as if it were a second deception. Should we then assume that you consider the offer of salvation merely a third deception? How far does your beliefs run in that direction?

            Recall that four of the six days of creation were spent constructing Earth. Whatever you believe of the actual creation of the universe, this story indicates that God thought it was important enough to spend far more time (at least in the literary sense) on it than on creating Heaven, which only took one day. Are you really going to tell us that he spent most of his time deliberately constructing a lie - a lie to those who most needed the truth? It is astounding that someone can view this incredible world, and then dismiss it such. Scientists whatever their flaws don't do that.

            All of this is why Satanists advance Science. And God does enable it, but each of those who fall to it have already made their spiritual choice. Similar to Romans where "God gives them up to depraved minds to do what ought not be done."

            I think there's a lot more depraved things out there than big "S" Science. One such is the worship of ignorance. That's what you do here.

            I find it interesting how much of this belief system you describe fits into an Orwellian dystopia. You attack "S"cience in a classic doublethink - "truth" is the eschewing of knowledge about the world. People who seek truths of the world are "refusing the love of truth" even though that is the exact opposite of what they believe and do. And most important, you claim to be questioning "S"cience, when you're really doubting reality such as it is.

            No scientist has done wrong, and they have correctly ascertained the physical laws of reality. But it is still the tainted fruit of knowledge.

            Then there's nothing to complain of. The apple doesn't become less tainted (assuming generously it was ever tainted in the first place!) because you refuse the responsibilities it creates.

            My point here is that your theological beliefs have consequences which you apparently haven't considered. As I see it, humanity has received three great gifts from God here. First, their existence and that of Earth. To claim that existence is merely a deception rather than something more, which due to the omniscience nature of God, would have to be deliberately schemed from the very beginning, shames God.

            The second is the gift of knowledge and free will - our ability to act for both good and evil. The claim that our attempts to use this gift, via science and other means to improve our lives and reduce suffering, is merely a second deception (again which would have occurred from the very beginning), shames God.

            The third is salvation. To claim that only those, who spurn God's gifts, who show ingratitude, who close off their senses and their minds, who spew lies and delusions (particularly, when most of that can be resolved with some simple observations) and then write off doubters as hopelessly lost to wickedness, can embrace salvation? That sounds like a spurning of the third gift, and shames God.

            You believe in God? Then live up to that. I'm tired of the coy references to "winter suns" and "red light", classic "peeling the onion" games where one attempts to rope others in with progressively more out-there ideas and assertions to lure the suckers in. You can't even say what you believe in, most of the time. That's pretty damning (perhaps even in the afterlife sense) bit of dishonesty right there.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 16 2019, @01:00AM (2 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 16 2019, @01:00AM (#787145)

              I appreciate your comments.

              I forgot to repeat another meaning of Energeian Planes: Operation (or working) of Wandering. Planes comes from the same root as planet(aka wandering star).

              I do not see reality as a delusion; the delusion is enabled by God by virtue of the physical laws that betray no supernatural origin. Those who had no concept of science saw no conflict between the Word of God and the world around them. Those who adhere to only that Science of the physical laws, to the exclusion of the Word of God, are those with a difficulty.

              I do not accuse those who will be condemned because of the delusion; any can be redeemed until the last hour. The major point is that those who will fall under the delusion, are doing so of their own will. They can not blame God for it any more than Eve can blame God for her choice to eat the fruit.

              The Earth, as it exists, is not a permanent thing. It is imperfect, due to Man's Fall and Satan's activities. It will be destroyed and replaced with a world without sin. On the large, I am not as concerned with it's nature as you spend so many words on. Why I should feel compelled to worship this world, I do not know. Ephesians 2: "As for you, you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you used to walk when you conformed to the course of this world and of the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who is now at work in the sons of disobedience. At one time we all lived among them, fulfilling the cravings of our flesh and indulging its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature children of wrath. "

              Simply look at the solar eclipse; if you can explain the red light inside the limb of the moon, do so. If you do not see a problem with it and the Allais Effect, very well.

              • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 16 2019, @03:14PM (1 child)

                by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday January 16 2019, @03:14PM (#787390) Journal

                I do not see reality as a delusion; the delusion is enabled by God by virtue of the physical laws that betray no supernatural origin.

                The delusion is enabled by God - again you say that God lies.

                Those who had no concept of science saw no conflict between the Word of God and the world around them. Those who adhere to only that Science of the physical laws, to the exclusion of the Word of God, are those with a difficulty.

                But even then, that is merely a difficulty. It is not wickedness.

                I do not accuse those who will be condemned because of the delusion; any can be redeemed until the last hour. The major point is that those who will fall under the delusion, are doing so of their own will. They can not blame God for it any more than Eve can blame God for her choice to eat the fruit.

                Then why enable delusion on those who need truth the most? Particularly, when the resulting delusion leads to condemnation which is eternal? It'd be one thing if such delusion were part of some greater process, much like the Buddhists' ideas on reincarnation who might be considered to have similar views on the nature of reality. At least there, the delusions and suffering caused will eventually lead to learning to help escape the cycle of reincarnation that they perceive.

                But it's not. There's only one chance, right? Else eternal damnation. And God is misleading just about everyone with this reality thing. It doesn't matter if Satan takes lead on the matter. It doesn't matter if people themselves contribute significantly to the delusion by choice. The problem here is that God too is enabling this powerful delusion.

                The Earth, as it exists, is not a permanent thing. It is imperfect, due to Man's Fall and Satan's activities. It will be destroyed and replaced with a world without sin. On the large, I am not as concerned with it's nature as you spend so many words on. Why I should feel compelled to worship this world, I do not know. Ephesians 2: "As for you, you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you used to walk when you conformed to the course of this world and of the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who is now at work in the sons of disobedience. At one time we all lived among them, fulfilling the cravings of our flesh and indulging its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature children of wrath. "

                God created it. Do you not appreciate his works? And while I grant there is a modest amount of Gaia worship and similar things, the studies that compose science aren't worship of anything.

                My view on this is that there is a huge paradox here. God allegedly expects worship and knowledge of the truth, but at the same time has allegedly created powerful delusions to hide both himself and that truth from us. I think there's a simple explanation here. Namely, that God, if he is of the form you say, doesn't intend us to be aware of him, doesn't expect worship, and doesn't expect us to know that which has been deliberately hidden from us. The universe is our sandbox for now, our natures shaped by that same crucible, and it turns out a lot bigger and weirder than we expected - it is our purpose to explore this and to do interesting things great and small. Our choices are what creates all the good and evil we experience and I think it matters a great deal what we do here even though all will eventually end here. If Satan exists as a separate entity from God, he is as subtle as God in concealing himself. One wonders why. According to typical theologies, he should have no reason to go along with the plans of God.

                What comes after, I have no idea. But a world without sin has certain implications, such as absence of free will and knowledge - the allegory of the Tree of Knowledge in reverse.

                Ultimately, I'm sorry, but I just don't buy that there's a perfect being out there who lies to the vast majority of us (even in this moderately indirect way), and then condemns us after death because we didn't find the truth that was hidden from us. I think there's a far simpler explanation - that you're understanding of God, the universe, etc is in error. How much I don't know, but beliefs should be consistent with themselves. Even God can't fix logical paradox.

                Given that these beliefs have you peering intently for signs that our knowledge is wrong in really simple and obvious ways (which incidentally we would have seen already, if they existed) indicates to me that these contradictions are harmful to you as well. I don't believe that the nature of God is such that he would punish you for what you believe even if it is blasphemous (which I think is the case here), but he probably wouldn't shield you from self-inflicted suffering either.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 16 2019, @03:34PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 16 2019, @03:34PM (#787403)

                  I see that you understand much of the implications, and that is good. God has deceived one other time in the Bible, I do not recall the passage. He sends a lying spirit to deceive. Again, I don't see it as God lying. The deceptions are always the result of prior states.

                  Free will can't be free if the correct truth is revealed upon you; the test is whether you accept God, or whether you don't. The world you experience is set up to enable both. If acceptance of God is preconditioned upon seeing proof of his existence in the world, there will be difficulty.

                  Satan also does not seek to reveal himself, because proof of his existence implies proof of God's. He seeks to draw Man away from God, precisely as the serpent did to Eve. And knowledge is the great tool.

                  As you do seem to understand much, I will quote this from Steve Wozniak's iWoz for amusement:

                  "As for religion, if I asked, my dad would say, no, no, he was scientific. Science was the religion. We had discussions about science and truth and honesty, the first discussions of many that formed my values. And what he told me was, he just wanted things to be testable. He thought that to see if something is true, the most important thing is to run experiments, to see what the truth is, and then you call it real. You don't just read something in a book or hear someone saying something and just believe it, not ever.
                  I eventually came to conclude that, yes, I believed the same thing. And at a super young age, I knew I would do something scientific when I grew up, too."

    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 15 2019, @04:51PM (4 children)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday January 15 2019, @04:51PM (#786961) Journal

      At most you could see people maybe live there for a few months until they have to come back. Its a pointless exercise and lacks any real clear purpose. It has no more value than a tightrope walk stunt, perhaps negative value because of the immense amount of resources it would drain we could better spend on earth.

      You already said the place was an airless vacuum that was going to kill them inside of a minute (and extreme temperatures and radiation almost as fast). How in the world did they make it several months?

      This is what cognitive dissonance looks like folks. First, speak of what happens when you drop a naked person on the Moon as if it were relevant. Then two paragraphs later implicitly acknowledge that no one is going to the Moon naked.

      But then the real problem is revealed! People don't want to live in shitty places! Except, of course, billions already do whether they want to or not. Without engineering nobody will live on the Moon ever. With engineering, it just becomes another place, a rather interesting place I might add, to live. If they can figure out how to get people to live on the Moon for months at a time, they certainly have the ability to figure out these nonsensical concerns.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @07:20PM (3 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @07:20PM (#787011)

        This is what bad reading comprehension looks like folks. First, assume extra meaning behind slightly ambiguous words as if your interpretation is obviously what the author meant. Then, two paragraphs later when their intended meaning becomes clear just ignore that part and criticize the supposed contradiction.

        Strawman ftw!

        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 15 2019, @07:42PM (2 children)

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday January 15 2019, @07:42PM (#787021) Journal

          This is what bad reading comprehension looks like folks.

          No, I think your example is far better. Ignore the previous post and dump an ad hominem. That's willfully bad reading comprehension.

          Strawman ftw!

          Indeed, but not on my side. In my defense, there was a lot of blather of how lethal the Moon was to an unprotected human while ignoring that's not what's going to be on the Moon followed by the implied assumption of living on the Moon for months (meaning those problems which make life dead fast have been resolved). On Earth, most of the Earth is lethal to unprotected humans who try to live in the environment for months. Sure, the degree of lethality is far less for most parts of Earth than on the Moon, but that's it. You need substantial infrastructure or survivalist skills to survive in the deserts east of Los Angeles or in the high Himalayas. Same is true for the Moon. We'll need a certain level of infrastructure and knowledge to make it. And as I noted, if you can live for a few months on the Moon, then you've figured out that hard stuff.

          Then, two paragraphs later when their intended meaning becomes clear just ignore that part and criticize the supposed contradiction.

          Sorry, didn't happen that way. And as I noted, a huge number of people live in places that suck. But we are to expect that the Moon will be different and people will not live there (whether or not they "want" to)? That somehow got missed in your straw man argument.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 16 2019, @02:53AM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 16 2019, @02:53AM (#787186)

            The OP clearly meant the moon is simply a harsh environment with little to no upside. I disagree with them and think we should make a moon colony, but my response to you was simply about you being too literal with the different paragraphs in order to be insulting. Just calling that out, and it appeared to be massive comprehension failure. In reality you were intentionally misunderstanding the post.

            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 16 2019, @05:51AM

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday January 16 2019, @05:51AM (#787255) Journal

              The OP clearly meant the moon is simply a harsh environment with little to no upside.

              Again, I disagree. In that litany of dangers no thought was given to what happens when they're solved as they would be when someone lives in a place for a few months or longer. The author also choose for no particular reason to declare that the idea of lunar colonization was "ridiculous and insane". The last paragraph does not absolve the sins of the first. And I still believe that going from declaring such things "ridiculous and insane" with a discussion of the dangers facing one who isn't protected by sensible and well-engineered infrastructure, to admitting that several months of settlement is feasible (but we wouldn't like it because even more irrelevant emotional factors like it's purposeless, etc) a glaring sign of cognitive dissonance not an .

              but my response to you was simply about you being too literal with the different paragraphs in order to be insulting.

              And what is the problem with that? Should we not be at least mildly insulting to those who clearly have thought about the subject enough to come up with a relatively accurate litany of details of the lunar environment and then pull out a sophomoric (and might I add, insulting!) argument that clearly wasn't thought through a bit. There's a point to discussing the value of would be colonization of the Moon, particularly the present weakness of economic arguments. But blithe and contradictory arguments about the impossibility of colonization are a waste of everyone's time.

              Politeness is wasted on such.

    • (Score: 2) by Gaaark on Tuesday January 15 2019, @05:51PM

      by Gaaark (41) on Tuesday January 15 2019, @05:51PM (#786979) Journal

      Would you say putting a colony on Mars is a better idea?

      I'd say the moon first, then Mars: the resources sent to Mars being resources not needed on the moon.

      Moon colony, then Mars colony.

      --
      --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
    • (Score: 2) by krishnoid on Tuesday January 15 2019, @10:40PM

      by krishnoid (1156) on Tuesday January 15 2019, @10:40PM (#787087)

      Well, you know how the saying goes: "Massachusettsans [lawsandsausagescomic.com] are from Mars, Floridians are from Venus."

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @03:33PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 15 2019, @03:33PM (#786924)

    My wild-ass guesses:
    1) Sure, variations been tried many times. The words you're looking for are "artificial biosphere".
    2) Artificial light, obviously. "Self-sustaining" is a bit of a misnomer - how long do you want to sustain it? How do plants on earth survive very roughly 12 hours of darkness per day? But for our purposes solar panels charging batteries capable of providing the light might be an answer.
    3) Fruit flies may have been selected to prove the point that we may need a defense against them (or maybe not if there's something about lower gravity that screws them up). I doubt the ones they brought up will evolve to be a problem to future place. But aside from that: They aid the decomposition process I believe. Decomposition, especially in a space environment, is something that would be needed to be as carefully managed as the growth. Maybe in a controlled environment they might become useful - temperature controls them well and any biosphere would need to have the ability to control its temperatures.

    "Big fleas have little fleas upon their backs to bite 'em,
    And little fleas have lesser fleas, and so, ad infinitum.
    And the great fleas, themselves, in turn, have greater fleas to go on;
    While these again have greater still, and greater still, and so on."

    If you're colonizing off earth DeMorgan might advise that you make sure you're taking the right fleas.

  • (Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday January 15 2019, @04:48PM (4 children)

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Tuesday January 15 2019, @04:48PM (#786960) Journal

    One of the articles says they are considering a manned base near the south pole. If they build it in the right place, it would NOT experience 2 weeks of darkness at a time. More like 2 weeks of darkness out of the entire year.

    The fruit fly is not going to take over the Moon since the environment outside of the little biosphere would be fatal. Still a puzzling choice.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    • (Score: 3, Informative) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday January 15 2019, @07:48PM (3 children)

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday January 15 2019, @07:48PM (#787023)

      Not really puzzling, short lifespan, high number of generations in a short mission timeframe.

      --
      🌻🌻 [google.com]
      • (Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday January 15 2019, @07:55PM (2 children)

        by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Tuesday January 15 2019, @07:55PM (#787027) Journal

        They have silkworms and microorganisms in there, some of which would have symbiotic relationships with the plants. But we don't really want fruit flies to be in our space habitats.

        --
        [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday January 15 2019, @08:17PM (1 child)

          by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday January 15 2019, @08:17PM (#787033)

          Fruit flies are sort of the go-to for genetic / breeding / evolutionary experimentation. Pretty sure there's a high level of confidence in keeping the flies contained within the experiment site.

          --
          🌻🌻 [google.com]
          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 16 2019, @03:15PM

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday January 16 2019, @03:15PM (#787391) Journal
            If fruit flies could thrive in hard radiation vacuum with the above temperature extremes mentioned, then they'd be doing more than just eating fruit on Earth.