[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: RE: RE: Re: starship-design: One way (again...)

In a message dated 12/10/97 2:24:39 PM, david@actionworld.com wrote:

>> ----------
>> From: 	Kelly St[SMTP:KellySt@aol.com]
>> Subject: 	Re:  RE: Re: starship-design: One way (again...)
>> flights to other stars might be fundable.)  But beyond that credible
>> reasons
>> are near nil.
>Right.  In the original concept for this design group, we were assuming
>some extremely pressing reason-to-go had come up.  I think the
>assumption was the remote detection of life-bearing planets in the
>target system, with a potential mission receiving large amounts of
>popular support.
>David Levine

Oh, yeah.  I forgot.

That actually might work.  A few people at NASA have mentioned the publics
interest in space would be much stronger if we found something like cannals on
Mars and a lost civilization, or wild life racing through a swampy  Venus or