Zach Weinersmith3d ago

Something I have trouble explaining about space travel. Like, if you've read my book, you know I think human space faring is probably not economically valuable. It's not a good use of science dollars compared to other areas. I'm even skeptical of the case for inspiration (it doesn't seem to causally related to more aerospace degrees).

But it's also just really cool. Why don't I feel this way about Antarctica or Seabed exploration?

Show threadCharlie Stross3d ago

@ZachWeinersmith Antarctic exploration *was* sexy 100-150 years ago, though! We kind of remember Captain Scott's ill-fated South polar expedition, but less so the ferocious international rivalry that drove it (or Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen who got there first and survived).

In contrast, now we have Antarctic bases, familiarity breeds … boredom?

Show threaddatarama3d ago

@cstross @ZachWeinersmith Perhaps unsurprisingly, here in Denmark we *do* remember Roald Amundsen. There are streets named after him and the like.

(But we have little if any cultural memory of Scott.)

Show threadlemgandi3d ago

@datarama @cstross @ZachWeinersmith

TBF, Scott didn't make it.

Show threadCharlie Stross3d ago
@lemgandi @datarama @ZachWeinersmith Scott *did* make it to the South Pole! But he got there weeks after Amundsen then his entire team died before they got back to base. (Killed by spectacularly bad weather, even by Antarctic standards.)
Show threadalanpaxton3d ago
@cstross @lemgandi @datarama @ZachWeinersmith nope. Killed by arrogant imperial incompetence and cutting things too fine.
Show threadThomas Phinney3d ago

@alanpaxton @cstross @lemgandi @datarama @ZachWeinersmith I would not call it “arrogant imperial incompetence.” First a rendezvous failed as the rest of Scott’s team simply failed to show up as expected, and then after prolonged bad weather, Scott and his last companions got stuck another 10 days in a blizzard just 20 km (12 mi) short of the final depot / meeting place.

All these arctic/antarctic explorers had to have some level of hubris to try so hard to be first. Given the competition, nobody was going to be first without significant risks.

The real shocker with Antarctic exploration is that there weren’t MORE deaths. These expeditions were all inherently risky. There were too many unknowns, & safety margins were not high enough to protect against all risks.

Show threadAdam Trickett  

@tphinney @alanpaxton @cstross @lemgandi @datarama @ZachWeinersmith a TV company re-enacted some of the expedition with like-for-like materials and food. The Scandinavian team ate like kings and actually gained weight, but the Brits all lost weight and were suffering malnutrition so the programme had to be stopped before they suffered long term effects.

Scott gambled and in most years would have made it back alive, but Amundsen had the better materials and food however you look at it.

Apr 6 at 6:53amWeb
Show threaddatarama2d ago
@drajt @tphinney @alanpaxton @cstross @lemgandi @ZachWeinersmith I read a while ago that a lot of the decisions Amundsen made while preparing the expedition (including diet, clothing, transportation) were based on things he'd learned while staying with Inuit for a winter. They taught him their own Arctic survival skills, which he concluded worked a lot better than modern European approaches. Hence the heavy furs, the dog sleds rather than motorized vehicles, etc.
Show threadalanpaxton2d ago
@datarama @drajt @tphinney @cstross @lemgandi @ZachWeinersmith The Huntford dual biography discusses this. Amundsen spent 3 years in the Arctic as the first to sail the Northwest Passage. In that telling he basically set out to learn all he could from the Inuit.