Was it worth it?

Was it worth it?

Other urls found in this thread:


Bit pointless wasnt it?

I am also wondering to the point of morale.
scientifically, it was very insignificant, but so was sending a man to the moon

Why climb that mountain?
Because it's there.
Why fling a dog into low orbit?
Because i can.

Doggo was hero.

Remember the doggo.

what of the dog's life?


Not the death of Laika, mind. Soviets were more than happy to let their cosmonauts die.

thousands of dogs get murdered in china/korea for meat, what difference does it make

Who cares?

i really regret hearing that audio of one cosmonaut suffocating to death and another cosmonaut cursing mission control over the radio as his reentry vehicle was burning up in real time

in fact at this point i dont really care to know if they were fake or not they sounded real enough

is it worth it?


Chinks are subhumans...

>Soviets were more than happy to let their cosmonauts die.

This is a myth. Lost Cosmonauts is likely a hoax.

According to the Scientists, they were all in tears and shit they had to let the dogs die. They were apparently "like children" to them and they had raised them since puppies.

They actually did try to find ways to bring them back.

No user dey were ebil gommunists.

according to wiki, most cosmo dogs went on a return trip. Laika, however, was never meant to come back home.

Was it worth it?

>Work with animals is a source of suffering to all of us. We treat them like babies who cannot speak. The more time passes, the more I'm sorry about it. We shouldn't have done it

>mfw Commies defend killing dogs in space

>Gazenko tells us that as engineers rushed against deadlines to complete the capsule that would carry the dog into space, outfitting it with equipment to record the details of her death, he took on a battle in Laika’s behalf. Against heavy objections from the decision-makers, he insisted upon the installation of a window. A window in a space capsule, where such a luxury would cause complications and expenses that I can barely imagine. A window for the dog whose monitored demise had been this man’s objective in all the interactions that had bonded her to him with the eager devotion of every well-trained working canine.

>Yet Gazenko persisted and prevailed.

TL;DR: They felt so bad for Laika that they even put a window in against regulations so at least she could look back on the earth and see her grand achievement.

Is this the communist version of a happy story?

That's... kinda heartwarming.

The technology developed to get man to the moon and back alive were very significant

but the act of putting neil armstrong in a moon and giving us all a lecture on the difference between steps and leaps wasn't a scientific breakthrough

Without sacrifice we would have nothing

The act of nuking the japs wasnt a scientific breakthrough either but the manhattan project would have been pointless if we hadnt

She may be a test subject, and she did die before she exit the atmosphere: but Soviet Russia needed a mascot for their space program.

It's significant of proving that man can live outside of the earth's exosphere.

Developing space technology has itself been pretty pointless.

I didn't need to hear that.

You can let soviet scientist touch a dog, they even made two headed monsters.

early on Cosmonauts didn't wear spacesuits.

so during reentry of one mission, the capsule was breeched during reentry. The lack of air pressure of the extreme upper atmosphere sucked all the air out of the Souyz capsule. the cosmonauts suffocated to death before they reached the ground.

In those times soviet engineers rushed against ridiculous deadlines in every space project they did, that also explains all the horrible accidents that cosmonauts suffered.

was it worth it?

No, that's the XX century version of a happy story, all the nations where pretty much bureaucrat assholes in those times.

the chimps NASA sent into space were brought back alive.

That dog did more than most of us here. It was worth it.

>XX century

Please be more of a twat

>commies fucked up one dog in a space
>oh oh oh evil gommies are evil!
>literally thousands of dogs and other animals are used in medical experiments all other the world, most of them killed after experiments
>nuffing wron

Most of those animals should be bred specifically for scientific experimentation.

You don't bring in random animals from shelters to do experiments on.

Laika...had a ruff life

Don't see the fucking difference
All animals are the same in their rights

Not all of them.

Not really.
See spinoff.nasa.gov/Spinoff2008/tech_benefits.html

How is that even remotely better?

>NASA technologies benefit our lives
>t. NASA

If you eat pigs you are subhuman

They did some fucked up shit.

Laika had a good life and watched the earth from above, before anybody else did.

Also space bat, never forget.


Are you suggesting that it's false?

>hey look we totally are worth it and were not created for dick waving!

>and watched the earth from above, before anybody else did.

I get the feeling she didn't care much while she suffocated alone.

Because animals bred for scientific experimentation will be at least treated humanely before, during and after experimentation. And bad breeders are usually blacklisted.

Yes, I'm aware that experimentation on animals could be considered cruel form an extremely naive perspective, but you don't just go straight to human testing without some concrete numbers.

Scientists do have some basic ethics training, you know. Or do you want to go back to the age of Mengele and Unit 731?

If you have a decent alternative, I'd like to know.

Nigga be my guest and disprove their claims then, I don't give a shit about NASA specifically but saying that developing space technology was of zero significance to life on earth is patently false.

Not necessarily, but of course NASA is going to say they're not a waste of money

>treated humanely
>but still killed

Awww shucks that's so nice of them!

I'm not saying that.

But the Space Race's benefits have been vastly outweighed by its costs to us.

>If you have a decent alternative, I'd like to know.
Testing on human volunteers.

I'm not against animal testing - beyond a basic empathy, but I understand it's necessary.

I'm just saying that drawing a distinction between literally breeding animals to experiment on them and experimenting on strays is a pretty stupid line to draw ethically. Both still involve the same actions that make the animal suffer.

When you have basically no funding you have to make yourselves seem useful. This isn't the 60's anymore. NASA gets almost no funding from the gubment nowadays.
Can't really see how people say NASA is a money sink when the Defense department spends 10 times the yearly budget of NASA on boondoggles like the F-35.

That's a different argument altogether to saying space technology is pointless. A great many of them have practical alternate uses. It's the same with military hardware.
The shit gets developed for arguably stupid reasons (international dickwaving) but then have good applications outside of the field they were designed for.

Dogs are no different than pigs or any other food animal.

They are just dogs

Structural analysis means safer buildings and bridges for everyone.

Solar energy is a renewable energy source and improving the efficiency of solar panels is always a good thing because we use so much electricity to begin with.

LED technology is what lights up your monitors and smartphones. And public lights in some countries. NASA's applications are mostly medical but could see use in food production in the future.

HACCP is why food safety is better than before.

AND THEN THERE'S PATENTS. NASA is one of the very few government organizations that makes money for the federal budget. And they do it via the patents they hold.


What breed of dog was Laika? Just a mutt?

Breach of ethical guidelines. We'd literally be going back to Mengele/Unit 731. If you don't tell your human test subjects possible effects of the drug/treatment up front, a ton of shit will happen legally. And no amount of money is gonna shut anyone up if they find out any detrimental effects of the tested drug/treatment that wasn't told to them before testing began.

Being on a phone means I am less able to look for examples to support my claim.

I was drawing a SCIENTIFIC distinction. Random shelter animals bring in a ton of unneeded variables that cannot be eliminated. In scientific experimentation, you'd want to isolate unneeded variables and test only the ones you need.

he said... on the internet

Link plox?


Your statement has no basis in fact.

Other than showing they care more about Humans than they care about themselves.

>moral questions

i dont hear the dog complaining

She didn't, she's dead once the capsule reached orbit.

How many feral dogs can say they've been into outer space?

dogs in general don't complain.