How to prepare for Mars? NASA consults Navy sub force

October 5, 2015 byMichael Melia
How to prepare for Mars? NASA consults Navy sub force
This Nov. 15, 2013 photo released by NASA shows the three-story Human Exploration Research Analog habitat at the Johnson Space Center in Houston. The space agency, which is contemplating a future journey to Mars, is working with a military laboratory at the submarine base in Groton, Conn., to measure how teams handle stress during month-long simulations of space flight. (Bill Stafford/NASA via AP)

As NASA contemplates a manned voyage to Mars and the effects missions deeper into space could have on astronauts, it's tapping research from another outfit with experience sending people to the deep: the U.S. Navy submarine force.

The space agency is working with a military laboratory at the submarine base in Groton, Connecticut, to measure how teams cope with stress during month-long simulations of space flight.

While one travels through outer space and the other the ocean's depths, astronauts and submariners face many of the same challenges. Isolated for long stretches of time, they rely on crewmates for their lives in remote, inhospitable environments.

"We have a shared interest with the Navy in team resilience," Brandon Vessey, a scientist with NASA's human research program, told The Associated Press. "When you stick people together for a long period of time, how are they going to do?"

The Navy research that piqued NASA's interest started about five years ago when the Groton-based Naval Submarine Medical Research Laboratory, at the request of the submarine force, began examining ways to make tactical teams work together better.

Through observation of submarine crews, the Navy scientists developed a way to evaluate how teams are performing. The study singled out important team practices including dialogue, critical thinking and decision-making and developed a way to assess how teams respond to setbacks. The research was made available more than a year ago to submarines' commanding officers, but it has not yet been institutionalized by the Navy.

"If this tool can identify precursors of when a team is about to change, that's particularly what we're hoping for," said Jerry Lamb, the lab's technical director.

The experiment with NASA is expected to begin in January or February. The space agency is taking a bigger interest in human behavior issues as it pursues the capability to send humans to an asteroid by 2025 and to Mars in the 2030s.

NASA is using a capsule about the size of a two-bedroom apartment at the Johnson Space Center in Houston to study how astronauts might perform and behave during lengthy missions. Four volunteers at a time live and work for 30 days at a time aboard the habitat, known as the Human Exploration Research Analog, which includes an airlock and is supported by a small version of mission control.

Video and audio recordings of the subjects from the experiment with the Navy lab will be sent to scientists in Connecticut for their analysis.

Ronald Steed, a former submarine commander who participated in the Navy's research, said the experience aboard a space ship will resemble that of submariners more as it travels farther into space and faces a longer delay in communications with Earth.

"Like a submarine commander can't always call to shore, you can't just call back to Earth for advice," he said. "The commander's going to have to have a set of tools that let him or her look at the crew and make a determination about where they are."

Explore further: US Navy introduces smoking ban on submarines

Related Stories

US Navy introduces smoking ban on submarines

December 31, 2010

Giving up smoking may be a New Year's resolution for some, but all US sailors will now have to follow suit, as the US Navy moves to ban its crews from smoking aboard submarines starting Friday.

NASA, US Navy to test space capsule recovery (Update)

August 15, 2013

The U.S. Navy and NASA are testing out how they'll recover astronauts once they splash down in the ocean following future missions to deep space, something a Navy crew hasn't had to do in nearly 40 years.

Recommended for you

ALMA discovers dew drops surrounding dusty spider's web

July 1, 2016

Astronomers have spotted glowing droplets of condensed water in the distant Spiderweb Galaxy – but not where they expected to find them. Detections with the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) show that ...

Chance microlensing events probe galactic cores

July 1, 2016

Some galaxies pump out vast amounts of energy from a very small volume of space, typically not much bigger than our own solar system. The cores of these galaxies, so called Active Galactic Nuclei or AGNs, are often hundreds ...

67 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

my2cts
2.1 / 5 (8) Oct 05, 2015
Why would anyone want to go to Mars? There are more comfortable ways to kill yourself.
How bad does the climate have to get before Mars becomes more comfortable than Earth ?
Doug_Huffman
1 / 5 (8) Oct 05, 2015
Any study of submarine crew effectiveness must include a time series.

The submariners of WWII and of the Cold War/Viet Nam Era are not the submariners of today. I would not serve in today's sub force, or Navy for that matter. The next boat to sink will have a female aboard.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (10) Oct 05, 2015
Why would anyone want to go to Mars?
@my2
the thrill of exploration? to be the first to do something? just because it is there?
i would go in a heartbeat!

also, there are some experiments that could benefit from having someone there boots on site to correct, fix, replace, work or simply adjust
How bad does the climate have to get before Mars becomes more comfortable than Earth ?
you know, if we don't actually fix our problems here, we will need to be able to survive somewhere... learning from space exploration would be a good thing, IMHO

.

The next boat to sink will have a female aboard
@doug
so?
what's your point?
bschott
1.5 / 5 (8) Oct 05, 2015
Why would anyone want to go to Mars? There are more comfortable ways to kill yourself.
How bad does the climate have to get before Mars becomes more comfortable than Earth ?


Nice. I am forced to agree.

learning from space exploration would be a good thing, IMHO


If it can be done safely with realistic mission parameters, I also agree with this.

if we don't actually fix our problems here, we will need to be able to survive somewhere.


If we can't survive here, we can't survive anywhere.

i would go in a heartbeat!


Bon voyage!
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (8) Oct 05, 2015
If it can be done safely with realistic mission parameters, I also agree with this
@bs
because it is regularly done without safety or mission parameters?
there is a regular safety meeting as well as training and mission parameters are also discussed regularly... so where are you going with this?

space has hardships that are not always foreseeable, much like exploration from 1400-1900
it is NOT new, simply different
If we can't survive here, we can't survive anywhere
assumption based upon ignorance. astronauts regularly survive in outer space in the ISS... which is not here. it is on orbit, which is also a hostile environment
Bon voyage!
nice troll comment

some of us have what it takes to go into the unknown and risk it for the advancement of knowledge never fearing & learning from mistakes

some cling to themselves hoping their POV and beliefs are correct
we will all die, regardless

no one gets out alive, so why not make the best of it?
bschott
1.8 / 5 (10) Oct 05, 2015
so where are you going with this?


Too many things for a comment thread, but the bottom line, no one way trip for humans. That's not how to "learn from space exploration". They have to come back for more reasons than can be counted before a one way trip happens.

assumption based upon ignorance. astronauts regularly survive in outer space in the ISS.


Where does everything they use to survive come from Stumpid? LMAO....a supply ship to Mars every 6 months??? Get a grip.

no one gets out alive, so why not make the best of it?


LMAO, exactly. If your idea of the best of it is a trip to mars and all that that would entail if you were to leave today...see troll comment above.

some of us have what it takes to go into the unknown and risk it for the advancement of knowledge never fearing & learning from mistakes


Says the muppet who follows the masses and preaches against anything they don't condone. You are a hypocrite.

Learn from it.

Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (5) Oct 05, 2015
They have to come back for more reasons than can be counted
@bs
this i can agree with, but the "1 way" trip was also volunteers and is more of a gimmick than science, IMHO
Where does everything they use to survive come from
i never claimed that they were not resupplied- or are you just pulling a jvk "insert random troll interpretation of stupidity here" tactic?
now you want to input random stupidity and make assumptions about a post without evidence? two can play that, you know
a supply ship to Mars every 6 months??? Get a grip
actually, there would have to be a few... depending on how many actual astronauts and conditions, fuel, air, water, and more... etc
If your idea of the best of it is
who said that was my idea of the best of it? My comment was about exploration, not a one-way mars trip

perhaps you are more like jvk than you imagine with your reading and comprehension problems?
it sure appears so above...

2Bcontinued
Captain Stumpy
4.6 / 5 (9) Oct 05, 2015
@bs (aptly named TROLL) cont'd
the muppet who follows the masses and preaches against anything they don't condone
so, if i require empirical evidence and validated claims, or i am interested in science and studies, then i am a "hypocritical muppet who follows the masses and preaches" [sic] but if i were to suddenly stuff my head so far up my bum that i could only see your point of view, i would suddenly become acceptable?
LOL

this is the problem with you so-called "skeptics" and your promotion of pseudoscience: just because you WANT to believe in something doesn't mean it is real or it is valid science

you regularly promote pseudoscience, but anyone like me who asks for something MORE in the evidence you denigrate... but somehow you think that is a logical approach to knowledge or science? we already have seen you demonstrate conspiracist ideation... now you're a trolling pseudoscience expert

perhaps you should learn instead?
http://ocw.mit.edu/index.htm
Nik_2213
5 / 5 (7) Oct 05, 2015
Perhaps they should also ask the 'British Antarctic Survey', who have a worthy track record for selecting small, stable, civilian 'Wintering' teams...

A submarine crew is a lot bigger, and subject to naval discipline.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (6) Oct 06, 2015
Perhaps they should also ask the 'British Antarctic Survey', who have a worthy track record for selecting small, stable, civilian 'Wintering' teams...

A submarine crew is a lot bigger, and subject to naval discipline.
@Nik
not a bad suggestion... there are a lot of similarities between antarctic living and space exploration, including the requirement of regular shipments of almost everything needed to survive (with the exception of O2)

bluehigh
4 / 5 (4) Oct 06, 2015
There's a few exceptions Captain (shields up - IMHO).

Breathable air, real time communications, emergency rescue availability, easily accessible fresh water, not so much intense UV radiation ... Antarctica is a holiday camp compared to Mars.

Maybe a single return trip for the glory but, like the Moon and Apollo missions, we won't go back to stay in the forseeable future.
bschott
1.7 / 5 (6) Oct 06, 2015
i never claimed that they were not resupplied-


Stumpid, you likened life on a frequently restocked space station in low earth orbit to a planet on the fringe of our suns "habitable" zone. Then, in your usual sloppy, transparent way tried to make your comment seem valid by implying mine was ill thought out, when clearly YOU made another dumb ass remark.

now you want to input random stupidity and make assumptions about a post without evidence? two can play that, you know


But you are doing so well by yourself little guy! Pedal faster!

so, if i require empirical evidence and validated claims, or i am interested in science and studies, then i am a "hypocritical muppet who follows the masses and preaches"


No, you are a hypocritical muppet because you said:

some of us have what it takes to go into the unknown and risk it for the advancement of knowledge never fearing & learning from mistakes


Implying you behave this way. You don't.
gkam
1.5 / 5 (8) Oct 06, 2015
Look at you people taking shots at each other. Can't we discuss issues without the hateful and nasty comments from the maladjusted who take their frustrations out on others here?

I thought this was a science site, and would be filled with professionals, not amateur "experts" with wiki and nothing else. Do you wonder why professionals do not post here?
bschott
1.7 / 5 (6) Oct 06, 2015
who said that was my idea of the best of it? My comment was about exploration, not a one-way mars trip


You said "why not make the best of it?" Stumpid. After you made the remark below.

the thrill of exploration? to be the first to do something? just because it is there?
i would go in a heartbeat!


Sounds like you're pretty eager. Did you put a lot of thought into changing planets?The term "I would go in a heartbeat" is as well thought out as most of your posts. How many astronauts world wide would jump on a ship headed to mars right now do you think?

this is the problem with you so-called "skeptics" and your promotion of pseudoscience


I sincerely hope you get your shot at a mars trip. No skeptics allowed on board.

bschott
1 / 5 (3) Oct 06, 2015
Can't we discuss issues without the hateful and nasty comments from the maladjusted who take their frustrations out on others here?


Don't misunderstand Gkam. There is no frustration (speaking for myself). Stumpid and I simply have no respect for each other due to conflicting....everything.

I thought this was a science site, and would be filled with professionals, not amateur "experts" with wiki and nothing else. Do you wonder why professionals do not post here?


The mix here is across the spectrum. There are a lot of professionals and high level students that frequent this site...just not the comments section. I see Otto is a big fan of yours...sorry.

"Professionals" occasionally post, you can tell because they will actually engage in conversations about physics as opposed to post board politics from there own point of view. An most won't tell others how to behave.
docile
Oct 06, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (3) Oct 06, 2015
There's a few exceptions Captain...
Breathable air, real time communications, emergency rescue availability, easily accessible fresh water, not so much intense UV radiation ... Antarctica is a holiday camp compared to Mars
@Blue
i absolutely agree
much like the ISS comment i gave above, there are a lot of exceptions because of the proximity (like rescue, communication etc), but i do think we have the ability to actually explore Mars in the near future
the biggest threats will be radiation and the fact that they have to carry EVERYTHING with them (the similarities) but we have at least some experience in long term space living with ISS etc, so we can actually plan ahead for some of the problems we know will happen/likely to happen

well said, b
we won't go back to stay in the forseeable future
debatable... i HOPE we do
technology is advancing fast enough to give hope for changes in the near future
some things can't be known yet
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (3) Oct 06, 2015
you likened life on a frequently restocked space station
@full of bs
ok, what i pointed out was that exploration here & in the ISS, etc, was no different because there are always unknown unknowns. this is the SIMILARITY that i wanted to point out that you chose to ignore, because your mind is full of conspiracy theory and pseudoscience, not intelligence

next time i will remember to use very small words so you can understand, ok?
Implying you behave this way. You don't
and you know nothing about me, so this is called unsubstantiated conjecture based upon transference and personal delusional beliefs that everyone is like you
You said "why not make the best of it?"
and i would, too, but you are simply trolling/baiting now
I sincerely hope you get your shot at a mars trip
well thank you, but i'm too old and don't have 20/20 uncorrected vision, which is a requirement for astronauts etc

you can learn from Blue, IMHO
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Oct 06, 2015
Stumpid and I simply have no respect for each other..
@full of bs
actually, i disagree about this: i can respect a valid argument that is based upon evidence that i can see/validate... i've had problems with MANY folk here, including Blue - BUT
-and i think you should pay attention here-
I can respect validated claims
(see above re Blue)

i DO completely disrespect pseudoscience because the whole basis of pseudoscience is their failure to comply with the tenets of the scientific method

THAT is where you and i differ - that and what we choose to perceive is evidence

I don't even accept singular studies as evidence (except of a claim) unless there is a lot of good reason... i can accept them as interesting or cool (BICEP)... but not as evidence unless it is validated (the scientific method)

This is my POV because of my background etc... i simply don't accept things that are subjective to the individual as valid science
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Oct 06, 2015
There is no frustration (speaking for myself). Stumpid and I simply have no respect for each other
@full of bs
one last point

no frustration here either
i very much dislike religion and pseudoscience but that is your choice to accept it, and i understand why you cling to it so strongly
http://journals.p....0075637

but i've also uprated zephir, realitycheck, cantdrive and others that are the worst trolls on the site when they have a valid comment that is logical (few and far between they may be)

.

This is the true reason of useless projects like the LHC, ITER or Mars mission
@zephir/docileTROLL
No, LHC etc missions are fundamental research... you don't like them because their fundamental research undermines your credibility and proves your own delusional religious beliefs to be false, like your daw/aw postings

your posts are validation of the conspiracist ideation link above
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.5 / 5 (8) Oct 06, 2015
Heres how psychopaths groom allies...
Look at you people taking shots at each other. Can't we discuss issues without the hateful and nasty comments from the maladjusted who take their frustrations out on others here?

I thought this was a science site, and would be filled with professionals, not amateur "experts" with wiki and nothing else. Do you wonder why professionals do not post here?
"Part of the hurt and damage was done because others could but would not see what was actually happening. He would always try to ingratiate himself to others it was sickening. Usually psychopaths put on the nicest act..."

-IMO.
bschott
1 / 5 (4) Oct 06, 2015
and you know nothing about me, so this is called unsubstantiated conjecture based upon transference and personal delusional beliefs that everyone is like you


When you say something like the above, which you do often, and say something like below, which you also do often, you appear schizophrenic.

i wanted to point out that you chose to ignore, because your mind is full of conspiracy theory and pseudoscience, not intelligence


You know nothing about me either and you contradict yourself. It's been pointed out twice in this back and forth of ours, you WANT to have lofty ideals and an adventurous,liberal outlook. But the reality is you back the established norm at every chance and lash out when someone questions it. You like using your labels in attempt to devalue other posters and their opinions and the only way you can determine if someone is wrong is if there is no paper they can link to support them.

You lack the ability to think objectively.

Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (5) Oct 06, 2015
You know nothing about me either and you contradict yourself
@full of bs
no, i can make decisions and base opinion upon your posts, which have demonstrated conspiracy ideation in the past, including the following posts
First, I am not looking for validation from mainstream peer review, it is a members only club and inclusion in it means you are either lying about what you believe so you can keep your status, or you really do believe as they and you do...in which case...well, you are has helpless as you are when it comes to understanding reality
which you posted here: http://phys.org/n...ing.html

your entire argument centers around your "distrust" of peer reviewed literature because of your conspiracist ideation, which is also visible in many other comments throughout PO... plus, there is your failure to comprehend the difference between types of evidence etc

2Bcont'd
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Oct 06, 2015
@full of bs cont'd
you choose to think that backing ANY claim as long as it sounds good is somehow open minded acceptance of reality, however, your mind cannot comprehend what reality is, therefore your choices are limited and you repeatedly accept delusion over fact: take this comment-
the reality is you back the established norm
this points out that you have no comprehension or ability to recognize the difference between "mainstream" anything and what constitutes actual evidence or something that is provable under the constraints of the scientific method
I don't care about "mainstream" or anything else, only what can be proven through repeated experimentation and validated through secondary sources (evidence)
You like using your labels in attempt to devalue other posters
it is not a matter of like, but expedience and efficiency
you repeatedly support pseudoscience and troll with bs, therefore the label is accurate and i can demonstrate it as such
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Oct 06, 2015
@full of bs cont'd
here is more proof that you don't understand the scientific method and you have blinders on when it comes to actual evidence and it's power
the only way you can determine if someone is wrong is if there is no paper they can link to support them
this is absolutely true in most of the posts for anyone who loves science

You are a pseudoscientist pushing delusional belief, so you feel threatened because you cannot actually validate your claims with evidence, so instead you attack the poster with hate and vitriol, like above
(and yes, it is an emotional discharge otherwise you would rationally link evidence supporting your conclusion)
this is not "objective thought" on your part, it is a defensive response because you are outed as a failure and your ego is challenged
https://www.psych...ttle-ego

bschott
1.7 / 5 (6) Oct 06, 2015
i DO completely disrespect pseudoscience because the whole basis of pseudoscience is their failure to comply with the tenets of the scientific method


If you could recognize when something is pseudoscience, we wouldn't disagree so often. When 2 mainstream theories are at odds with one another...say gravitational accretion for formation and the Roche limit for destruction, at least one, if not both are wrong.

THAT is where you and i differ - that and what we choose to perceive is evidence


Exactly. You perceive a peer reviewed paper as evidence, I can read the paper and see why it isn't. My example above, the Roche limit is based on math of force differential, caused by gravity. It ignores what "breaking force" is, (friction). It neglects that the nature of gravity prevents it from being able to apply breaking force to an object. The only way to make both valid is a math trick, you don't have to know how to do the math, just what math is missing.

docile
Oct 06, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
docile
Oct 06, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Osiris1
3 / 5 (2) Oct 07, 2015
I keep saying: "We gotta build a real exploration ship!" Repeat...SHIP!! Not some one hit wonder of a glorified artillery shell with a few thrusters fuelled with peroxide; but a real ship with nuclear or fusion power source and space propulsion NOT based on petroleum products sold by the overbloated and way tooo influential petromonopolists. Superconducting Em-Drive or VASIMR or M2P2, or focus fusion direct rockets would give us very high speeds with far less need to devote 95% of the craft to fuel and tanks. Construction in space for a large keeled practical ship with sections that revolve to provide shirt sleeve environments at approx 1g yet allows other sections, non revolving, to handle navigation, propulsion, lander bays, airlocks, observation decks, hydroponics bays for agriculture, etc. for a crew of 50 or so of all the skilsets needed for exploration. Such a ship should be able to 'drive' to Mars or wherever without exotic orbits in 30 to 50 days...and no one dies!
docile
Oct 07, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
EnsignFlandry
3.7 / 5 (3) Oct 07, 2015
but a real ship with nuclear or fusion power source
Don't even ask for nuclear space-ship, this would be just a recipe for another disaster to happen. Try to imagine the Chernobyl reactor - but not exploding at ground, but at high altitude instead. Not to say, such a device would violate the nuclear space proliferation treaty: once we would allow it, the Russians and Chinese would fill the cosmic space around Earth with nuclear bombs without any hesitation, because nobody would be able to check, if the radioactivity presented at stratosphere comes from nuclear engines or another devices.


A nuclear-powered ship would not look like an orbiting bomb. Besides, it would be a ship, going places, not staying in earth orbit. It would seem to me we could renegotiate the treaty to allow for such a ship. Besides, If Russia, or especially China, ever decide to build a nuclear powered ship, they won't be bothered by a little thing like a treaty.
EnsignFlandry
1 / 5 (1) Oct 07, 2015
Now boys, play nice, or we'll make you bring you toys in and go to your rooms. The rest of us will discuss science, math, and technology.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Oct 07, 2015
You perceive a peer reviewed paper as evidence, I can read the paper and see why it isn't
@full of trolling bs
Dunning-Kruger, narcissism and delusional emotional response
you should read up on it...
a cognitive bias wherein relatively unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly assessing their ability to be much higher than is accurate
thanks for validating my above statements, BTW

you don't have to know how to do the math, just what math is missing
right! gotcha. i should have told this to the prof when i was in school... could have saved me a lot of time and effort... LOL

Besides, If Russia, or especially China, ever decide to build a nuclear powered ship, they won't be bothered by a little thing like a treaty.
@EnsignFlandry
Actually, this is a very good point, IMHO
bschott
1 / 5 (4) Oct 07, 2015
Stumpid - Your lack of understanding about most topics makes your attempt at psychological evaluation even more entertaining than conflictionary posts about your values and how you perceive yourself as a forger of new ideas. Oddly, you use this exact same evaluation for everyone who disagrees with you...likely because you are the poster child for the condition itself.

right! gotcha. i should have told this to the prof when i was in school... could have saved me a lot of time and effort... LOL


After interacting with you, this is now the most accurate thing you have ever said.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Oct 07, 2015
how you perceive yourself as a forger of new ideas
@full of troll bs
who ever said i was a forger of new ideas?
conflictionary posts about your values
by all means, cite and link this for everyone to see
Oddly, you use this exact same evaluation for everyone who disagrees with you
not really. only those who demonstrate the problem:
oddly enough, the anonymity of the internet is what gives trolls like you the feelings of superiority that feed your Dunning-Kruger and allow it to empower you to make posts that are so blatantly wrong or stupid (like your interpretations of evidence, for instance)
this is common among non-moderated sites like PO - however, on moderated sites where the MODS typically have experience or knowledge in the areas, people like you, rc, cd, zeph, etc, get perma-banned because you can't seem to learn the difference between your opinion and actual science, usually caused by your mental afflictions (see above)
bschott
2 / 5 (4) Oct 07, 2015
who ever said i was a forger of new ideas?


You did above Stumpidiot:

some of us have what it takes to go into the unknown and risk it for the advancement of knowledge never fearing & learning from mistakes


by all means, cite and link this for everyone to see


They are already on this website, any post you make where you tell someone else what to do or how to act will suffice, these posts are always in support of what is said by the people who you deem to be authoritative on the subject

oddly enough, the anonymity of the internet is what gives trolls like you the feelings of superiority


I am using my own name you dumbass, how is it you manage to remember to breath to stay alive?

Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (3) Oct 07, 2015
You did above
@full of troll bs
being willing to go and help/explore is not the same thing as being a researcher searching & "forger of new ideas"
your assumption is called transference
They are already on this website
then you should be able to be very specific and quote/link them, right?
any post you make where you tell someone else what to do or how to act will suffice
not really: this is a science site, therefore the poster should be at least semi-aware of the science, guidelines, etc
posting religion/pseudoscience etc is already indicative that the poster is illiterate & likely biased or cognitively challenged, etc
I am using my own name you dumbass
so? so am i... that doesn't mean you are also posting your address, phone number, etc
there is still an anonymity due to lack of physical contact, social contact or direct physical interpretations of body language, etc that lets you day things here that you wouldn't IRL

2Bcont'd
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (3) Oct 07, 2015
@full of troll bs cont'd
my own name you dumbass
this is why you are able to actually call people dumb*ss while feeling safe enough to do it at your own location

if you were in the presence of or actually face to face with the person, you would not have the same courage, nor would you likely be capable of discussion without either running away or fighting, etc

this is another manifestation of your cognitive deficiencies, in that you cannot comprehend how the internet gives you freedoms to openly say things you would be afraid to say IRL face to face
these posts are always in support of what is said by the people who you deem to be authoritative on the subject
no, they are in support of the studies or evidence
i don't give one whit about people, with rare exception, and that is always qualified by circumstances

just because you want to believe something doesn't make it true any more than standing in a field makes you a cow
bschott
1.8 / 5 (5) Oct 07, 2015
@full of troll bs
being willing to go and help/explore is not the same thing as being a researcher searching & "forger of new ideas"
your assumption is called transference


Your words

go into the unknown and risk it for the advancement of knowledge


Knowledge only advances with new ideas Captain, knowledge happens when old ideas that are proven false get tossed out. Not acknowledging when you fuck up is called denial. Again, not really a way to "forge ahead".

poster should be at least semi-aware of the science,


So you decide to post in articles about astrophysics...interesting choice.

lets you day things here that you wouldn't IRL


Anyone who knows me knows this is the real life me bud. I catch flack from my group for even posting here with you guys, and being myself under my real name. It was done for a reason and I would be happy to have a skype chat with you anytime.

You'd be surprised. Especially at some of the people involved.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (3) Oct 07, 2015
Your words
@full of troll bs
your interpretations/fallacies
Knowledge only advances with new ideas
and the assumption that an explorer must always be a scientist is a logical fallacy based upon ignorance- not all of the workers on the Antarctic missions are scientists
you can try to make this assumption based upon current space flight parameters, however, actual exploration of another planet would likely require a list of skills that you might not actually fill with MS/DR degree holding scientists, etc
knowledge happens when old ideas that are proven false get tossed out
fair argument, but this only demonstrates your problem with comprehending evidence and supports my above conclusions
Not acknowledging when you fuck up is called denial
then you are in denial
i've never had a problem admitting when i screw up... and that is evident in my posts here on PO as well

feel free to peruse them and see for yourself
bschott
2 / 5 (4) Oct 07, 2015
if you were in the presence of or actually face to face with the person, you would not have the same courage, nor would you likely be capable of discussion without either running away or fighting, etc


OK. But geography may be an issue.

just because you want to believe something doesn't make it true any more than standing in a field makes you a cow


I have said this directly to you without the cow reference.Math doesn't make something true when it isn't either.

i don't give one whit about people,


I actually do...just not their feelings when they need a beating from the reality stick. As a former soldier you are aware of realities most aren't, this group I mentioned has a former navy seal involved who has been greatly helped with his TBI issues. He is active in trying to get the tech. to people whom he knows could be helped...as usual, the system is the only thing in the way.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Oct 07, 2015
@full of bs
Anyone who knows me knows this is the real life me bud
sure. that is what all the trolls say...
perhaps you are not aware of rule 37?
i know for a fact that you would not talk sh*t to me in person
I catch flack from my group for even posting here with you guys
so?
I would be happy to have a skype chat with you anytime
i am not anonymous, and i don't skype... perhaps you would just like to visit and "pound your chest" a bit?

you should not have a problem... although, the address listed is only going to get you within 50 miles (depending on what you use, it's 30-62 miles off)
i suggest using e-mail, then i can then provide you with a series of coordinates should you wish
You'd be surprised. Especially at some of the people involved
not really
i don't care

rule 37 - there are no [insert claim here] on the internet
it's good advice
it also goes back to validation and evidence
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Oct 07, 2015
But geography may be an issue
@full of bs
finance will be more of an issue
Math doesn't make something true
and again, your assumption is that math is completely symbolic and not applicable IRL, thus per your claims, physics/QM is completely unreal and can't be used to make predictions, etc
(EDIT) when something isn't true, it isnt

perhaps you should rethink it? or add qualifiers?
I actually do
good for you
this group I mentioned has a former navy seal involved who has been greatly helped with his TBI issues
threats are meaningless to me, and i don't fear a Navy Seal any more than they would fear a kindergarten class... i've worked with them in the past and we tend to get along quite well. has to do with respect and (wait for it) evidence... being able to validate your claims or back up your BS... this is how you earn things like respect and honor... not by the talk, but by the walk

i rather enjoy talking with SEALS because we share a lot in common
bschott
1.7 / 5 (6) Oct 07, 2015
and the assumption that an explorer must always be a scientist is a logical fallacy based upon ignorance- not all of the workers on the Antarctic missions are scientists
you can try to make this assumption based upon current space flight parameters, however, actual exploration of another planet would likely require a list of skills that you might not actually fill with MS/DR degree holding scientists, etc


Now you are starting to sound more like me, well done! Does this mean you will stop asking for ID/credentials? Doubt it.

this is why you are able to actually call people dumb*ss


I called you dumbass because you made a completely wrong assumption and then proceeded to more wrong assumptions based on your first one....ahhh, now I get why you like mainstream astrophysics.

I call anyone, including myself a dumbass when they or I do something that is dumbass.

I am a dumbass for thinking a soldier would have an open mind.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Oct 07, 2015
Does this mean you will stop asking for ID/credentials?
@full of troll bs
i never ask for ID/Credentials. I DON'T CARE about them: rule 37 ... you are having a senior moment or you need to put the bottles/pills down
ahhh, now I get why you like mainstream astrophysics
personal conjecture and conspiracist ideation based upon delusional Dunning-Kruger
I call anyone, including myself a dumbass when they or I do something that is dumbass
so start calling yourself one, especially for this part
I am a dumbass for thinking a soldier would have an open mind
you mean like your SEAL friends?
so... you can try to use them like a broom and threaten others with them because it makes you feel superior when asked to back up your own posts but us soldiers don't have open minds for anything else?

interesting....
and very closed minded of you

thanks for the insight
bschott
1 / 5 (6) Oct 07, 2015
threats are meaningless to me, and i don't fear a Navy Seal any more than they would fear a kindergarten class.


Oh man, what are you talking about? Fear of what?

i rather enjoy talking with SEALS because we share a lot in common


I have never personally talked to him, it's a large group based out of many locations. I think you may have misinterpreted my intentions in speaking face to face with you. You have a picture of me based on our interactions, it's likely 50/50 for accuracy.

In all honesty I doubt we would butt heads the way we do here. The videos that you label pseudoscience whenever I post them here actually have working tech based on the principle mechanism, what it does is nothing short of extraordinary. But you must have a certain "fundamental" understanding to get it. The validation and evidence you ask for are in abundance....just not available to the public quite yet. But I'd show you just because of our relationship.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Oct 07, 2015
Oh man, what are you talking about? Fear of what?
@full of troll bs
try re-reading your own posts and my quotes of your words and then pull your head out-
I think you may have misinterpreted my intentions in speaking face to face with you
i can only interpret based on what you wrote and the filler with it, like
this group I mentioned has a former navy seal involved
combining this with your "thinking a soldier would have an open mind" indicated you are feeling superior to soldiers/military and that blue collar are below you, then couple that with your other aggressive posts (AKA threats) and challenges to "skype" and it is also demonstrative of Dunning-Kruger and superiority complex, along with some sociopathic narcissism
it's likely 50/50 for accuracy
and yet there is a lot i can tell about a person by continuing to read how to post here and elsewhere... from certain insecurities to your beliefs of personal superiority manifesting above...
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Oct 07, 2015
@bs cont'd
In all honesty I doubt we would butt heads the way we do here
maybe, maybe not. i am not different in person than here, with the exception that i am intolerant of certain things (like threats)
The videos that you label pseudoscience whenever I post them
if it aint primary sources, it is not SCIENCE... this is another failing that you can't comprehend... i wouldn't tell Prof Lewin to research youtube video's as evidence of black holes because the first thing out of his mouth would be: where are the studies and original sources? measurements? links/citations/sources?
a video/youtube is simply a means of sharing- it is NOT a valid peer reviewed source of information, thus it is NOT valid unless linked THRU a study (See: Francis et al)
The validation and evidence you ask for are in abundance....just not available to the public quite yet
then it isn't REAL because it cannot be validated or accessed as proof
try that one in court
bschott
1 / 5 (4) Oct 07, 2015
you mean like your SEAL friends?


As i said, not my friend. He was introduced to others based on recommendation that he may be able to benefit from trying out the tech, and he does have an open mind...but he no longer behaves like a retired seal, you still behave like soldier...personal difference and I shouldn't have generalized.

so... you can try to use them like a broom and threaten others with them because it makes you feel superior when asked to back up your own posts


His only use would be the evidence you keep asking for. Until the studies are done the only evidence is people getting better. Don't mistake my hostility towards you and your close mindedness for me treating others this way. I have to be presented with a lot of unwarranted arrogance and a "do as I say, not as I do" mentality for me to get chippy, but other than my fiance (who likes a good verbal scrap), this site is only place people can bring it out.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Oct 07, 2015
now... specifically about this comment
The validation and evidence you ask for are in abundance....just not available to the public quite yet.
lets back up a minute and think along another line entirely:
You are in a court and you must present evidence to a judge for the guilt/innocence of a party...

would YOU tell a judge
The validation and evidence you ask for are in abundance....just not available to the public quite yet. But I'd show you just because of our relationship
Would you?
No- because evidence not available to everyone for validation is not evidence, it is personal conjecture and unsubstantiated

this is the basis of conspiracist ideation as well as the basic premise of religions (which is hwy they're subjective and cannot be constrained by the scientific method)
this is also why eyewitness testimony is not considered good evidence unless validated by other evidence

get it now?
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Oct 07, 2015
he no longer behaves like a retired seal, you still behave like soldier
@full of bs
no, i behave like a retired investigator, which is what i also was paid to do as a soldier
INVESTIGATE (hence my reliance upon evidence over subjective claims or personal conjecture - and my refusal to accept authority over evidence)
His only use would be the evidence you keep asking for
like i said: i was not just a soldier, but an investigator... there are different jobs in the military other than Combat arms, and i served in both capacities
Don't mistake my hostility
i make no assumptions about you that aren't backed up by evidence here
and i don't CARE about your personal life, opinions or methodologies, except where they skip right past logic and evidence into the unsubstantiated areas of your personal beliefs

and i am like that ALL the time... i don't care what or if you believe, BUT... it IS NOT SCIENCE

got that yet?
bschott
1 / 5 (4) Oct 07, 2015
then it isn't REAL because it cannot be validated or accessed as proof


Tell that to the lives that have been saved over the last 8 years...people who's testimony would be admissable as evidence.

if it aint primary sources, it is not SCIENCE... this is another failing that you can't comprehend...


Stump, it's this close minded attitude that stifles progress, and it is also completely incorrect. The masses may require primary source validation, this is in the works. But the science came from a guy like me, blue collar advanced to white due to time put in and knowledge gained. If I demonstrate superiority, it comes directly from being involved in the projects I am and trying to make others aware that things are not always how the people in authority say they are.

with the exception that i am intolerant of certain things


Indeed.

(like threats)


I'm sorry if you feel that I mentioned a navy seal to threaten you. it wasn't.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Oct 07, 2015
people who's testimony would be admissable as evidence
@full of bs
sigh - please read this: https://en.wikipe...tication

you may provide what you think is "evidence", however, considering the constraints of the scientific method (see: https://en.wikipe...evidence ) or even the constraints mentioned above, then said evidence can be either:
1- accepted as valid (or validated)
2- rejected due to failure to meet constraints (see above)
eyewitness testimony is like hearsay (same as your above quote) and holds as much validation as religious "claims" because of the subjective nature as well as lack of constraints or controls, etc
it's this close minded attitude that stifles progress
i am not close minded, i simply require evidence that is valid or validated... i actually love new studies and new stuff... but UNTIL, and i repeat UNTIL IT IS VALIDATED, it is nothing more than something of interest
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Oct 07, 2015
@bs...
THIS is what is irritating and wrong about your superior attitude and beliefs... you state
The masses may require primary source validation, this is in the works
however, if you would read the following: https://en.wikipe...c_method

you would see that it is NOT the masses that require tight constraints/controls on evidence at all, but SCIENCE ITSELF!
without the controls, then anyone (say, Zephir) can make a claim (like jvk regularly does) and it would be considered "valid" because HEY, look! they can show what appears to be a lgical progression of evidence/logic/argument from a-z that actually describes said issue... therefore, they must be right... this really is the actual definition of Pseudoscience, by the way
https://en.wikipe...oscience

bschott
1.6 / 5 (7) Oct 07, 2015
it IS NOT SCIENCE


Couldn't you find BIGGER CAPS? We can differ on what is and isn't science, you have your,forging ahead dogma approach. I have my forging ahead, tossing out old ideas that no longer work and embracing the new ones that do approach.

Good luck with yours, and when the info. becomes public you will be the first person outside of friends and family that I come here and post a link to. If it is even necessary by then.

Lastly, as I have to get back to work Mr. Investigator: Look into the concept of charge differential, find out how many systems we as humans are aware of that operate because of this principle, don't stop until you have found them all, make sure it is all peer reviewed primary sources. You will like the reading...and may even have a "eureka" moment...or don't.

And remain a dumbass.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Oct 07, 2015
@bs cont'd
But the science came from a guy like me, blue collar advanced to white
then i applaud your hard work... however, i suggest some retraining in the evidence department, because you are still unable to differentiate between what is provable and what is speculation

anecdote is NOT provable unless you want only to prove that a claim was made...it can only be used as descriptive method to teach (possibly)
If I demonstrate superiority, it comes directly from being involved in the projects I am and trying to make others aware that things are not always how the people in authority say they are
and until you can validate a claim then it is unsubstantiated conjecture and can be dismissed as trolling or baiting for thrills... it is also not science or evidence if it cannot be validated, BTW (see above)

this is also the underpinning of conspiracist ideation - and why valid evidence is necessary for evidence
I'm sorry
apology accepted
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (5) Oct 07, 2015
Couldn't you find BIGGER CAPS?
unlike moderated forums, this site doesn't allow manipulation of font to the degree i am used to, thus i choose to use caps for emphasis
We can differ on what is and isn't science
not really: if you follow the above descriptions and definitions,then it is very clear what is and is not science, just like what is and is not evidence (differences between hearsay, validated studies, etc)
you will be the first person outside of friends and family that I come here and post a link to
ok.. make sure it is validated before you link it, otherwise it is simply a neat idea
thanks
Look into the concept of
sure, as long as you come back and actually take time to read those links i provided above and justify your belief about your explanation where hearsay/anecdote single studies without validation can somehow be overwhelming evidence for something...

until then
unrealone1
3.7 / 5 (3) Oct 08, 2015
Why not just use the old lunar lander module? They only flew on earth once, should still work.
If they ever worked at all?
May be Stanley Kubrick has the old lunar lander module in his garage?
docile
Oct 08, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (5) Oct 08, 2015
This attitude delayed the acceptation of cold fusion
No ZEPHIR, the lack of empirical evidence and the inability to produce repeatable experimentation that works every time, as well as the blatant charlatanism, fraudulent practices and overwhelming number of CON MEN are the reason your pseudoscience beliefs aren't spread like wildfire over the earth...
if you had a method that is constrained and controlled by the scientific method that worked, and it could be repeated and demonstrated, then it would be funded and world news

throwing money at a failing proposition is not a means to somehow propel said proposition into magically working
... that is a delusion that is supported by all pseudoscience idiots like yourself who refuse to accept the constraints of the scientific method. just because you BELIEVE in something doesn't make it true, and throwing money at failures is just another way to embolden or empower CON MEN
(like you)
Returners
1.5 / 5 (4) Oct 09, 2015
I was thinking of having astronauts live under water for 3 years without coming to the surface and without outside contact.

There'll be a biodome where they grow their own food, and recycling systems so they can drink water from their own piss and stuff, just like they would on Mars.

Extra Vehicular Actvities would be designed to model similar activities on mars: Drilling core samples, making repairs to the habitat, collecting rock and soil samples,

To simulate the psychological effects of a red sky, there would be red lighting both inside and outside the capsule and it will turn off at sunset and turn on at sunrise.
antigoracle
3.7 / 5 (3) Oct 10, 2015
Why would anyone want to go to Mars? There are more comfortable ways to kill yourself.....

This guy says why better than anyone.
https://www.youtu...G1M4EXrQ
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Oct 10, 2015
This guy says why better than anyone
@AntiG
thanks for that... great points and good vid!

.
I was thinking of having astronauts live under water for 3 years without coming to the surface and without outside contact
@returners
actually that is a good idea
the differences would be similar (except pressures) and the resupply issues would be similar... except (again) for pressures

plus the water contamination could in some ways mimic the sand/dirt infiltration issues for Mars...

the problem would be the long term exposures to high pressure (which are different than the long term exposures to microgravity)
HeloMenelo
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 10, 2015
it IS NOT SCIENCE


Couldn't you find BIGGER CAPS? We can differ on what is and isn't science, you have your,forging ahead dogma adeas that no longer work and embracing the new ones that do approach.
person outside of friends and family that I come here and post a link to. If it is even necessary by then.

Lastly, as I have to get back to work Mr. Investigator: Look into the concept of charge differential, find out

And remain a dumbass.


aaaah looki here... we have ourselves a new playmate, BS eh ? lol... ooo this is going to be fun.. i'll try be nice to the greenhorn, i can see lot's of fun moments ahead of us in future, ps Captain Stumpy always win, you don't want to end up like waterprophet/donglish/antisciencegorilla,shooti... ?or Do you...lol :D Their a strange breed not being able to comprehend actual scientific reality, nor understanding their own little reality of why they actually believe in silkworms being their puppet masters..
HeloMenelo
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 10, 2015
Couldn't you find BIGGER CAPS?

unlike moderated forums, this site doesn't allow manipulation of font to the degree i am used to, thus i choose to use caps for emphasis

We can differ on what is and isn't science

not really: if you follow the above descriptions and definitions,then it is very clear what is and is not science, just like what is and is not evidence (differences between hearsay, validated studies, etc)

you will be the first person outside of friends and family that I come here and post a link to

ok.. make sure it is validated before you link it, otherwise it is simply a neat idea
thanks

All aces in full flare.
HeloMenelo
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 10, 2015
Well said Captain
docile
Oct 10, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.