From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@datamann.com)
Date: Sun Feb 17 2002 - 17:27:16 MST
Harvey Newstrom wrote:
>
> Spudboy100@aol.com quoted,
> > http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99991936
> > "Magic number" for space pioneers calculated
>
> This entire article is unsupported. It clearly acknowledges the possibility
> of using sperm banks to maintain genetic diversity. However the article
> prefers to carry an entire population for genetic diversity instead. The
> article says that "the family", "a million-year-old institution" is the
> "right stuff" but it doesn't say why.
>
> This solution does not help space exploration or the viability of
> multi-generational space missions. This is merely an attempt to impose
> traditional family units onto space travelers and to limit sexual
> reproduction to married couples while shunning the use of artificial
> insemination. I see no reason why these traditional (and possibly
> religious) limits should be imposed on the space program.
Its fairly simple: a spaceship is going to be the most space, energy,
and mass restrictive habitat that humans have ever encountered and will
thus require that the crew be planned to operate by the most stable
social structures humans have evolved for. T'ain't no welfare moms in
space.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 13:37:39 MST