Ok , so here it goes .  I haven’t bothered to Google the size of space however the very minimal knowledge I have on this topic tells me that it’s so large nobody actually knows where it starts and where it finishes ( god botherers excluded as they have inside knowledge ) .  So I’m also no expert on what it takes to launch projectiles into space but for the sake of my idea I’m going to assume we can get stuff into space without a rocket to project it ? Maybe not humans , but stuff .  If not now , I wouldn’t assume it’d be too hard to divert their space exploration efforts from getting humans up there and invent something merely to get “stuff” up there . 

 

So what kinda “ stuff “ you ask ?  .. so here’s the kicker and the answer the so called professionals should be welcoming with open arms .  Garbage , waste , fumes , non biodegradeables , anything really we don’t want here .   We could make big cannonball like projectiles and launch the shit into space . I’m thinking like a big hydraulic gun barrel that just launches shit into space . Even the worst criminals if you wish . If they splat from the gforce of launch meh .. but since there is this big black area of nothing why can’t we just launch our shit into it whilst we work on a better soulution ? It’d buy us at least a few thousand years and we won’t be extinct by 2030 as a bonus .   

 

Ok , so what’s the hurdles and/ or negatives ? 

You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!

Join 1Eyed Eel

Votes: 0
Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • This reply was deleted.
    • Didnt krypton blast that bad bastard and his crew into space supposed to be for ever and stay there But the bastard ended up coming here and that didn't end to well .so all the shit we send might end up back here .just saying

  • Interesting concept.

    2 points that I can think of:

    1. I imagine it would be quite costly to propel masses of waste outside of earths atmosphere. See the giant rockets on NASA shuttles just to get them outside of our atmosphere. Gravity is the enemy here.

    2. If it were feasible to get all of our junk into outer space, whats to stop it re-entering our atmosphere again at a later time?

    • Isn’t there already heaps of space junk ?  Only going off what I’ve seen in movies but I’m thinking space is littered with rocks and shit which only rarely enters Earth ?  Needs to enter at speed ? 

      • I think you are right. Once out of our atmosphere, it would take some sort of impetus to send it back our way. And besides, who doesn't love a tin can and banana peel shower when they are lounging on the beach?

  • How much shit can we throw out and how much will it cost to set it up and  run.

    If it costs too much to get the shit up there then it wont happen as greedy people want it done for nothing.

    • Well this costs  I don’t have any idea of . I’ve just thrown up an idea without any regard for its financial viability . Pretty much just like the climate alarmists 

       

      I guess when you look over say the next 100 years , the designing , building and operation costs would be pretty minimal .  Compared to the carbon taxes , tip fees , climate research and donations to the multitudes of fucktards we fund to research things like wind farms , and god knows what other of our taxes are leeched in the name of climate , it’d be a pittance . 

       

      In regards to what we can throw out , well the sky’s literally not the limit . I guess as first and foremost I’d start with things like asbestos , toxic waste, African gangs , child abusers ,all copies of political correct movie remakes like Ghostbusters  and I guess the biggest environmental risks .  

       

      But in all seriousness , if we aren’t researching the possibility of launching waste out of our atmosphere , then this climate “ emergency “ isn’t really as bad as they’d have you believe .  We could send a couple of big balloons up and then use rocket propulsion to send it the last leg . 

       

       

      Wheres Kramer ? 

      • I reckon the idea is brilliant but we don't have the technology to viably do it. The amount of fuel/energy it would take to propel a meaningfull amount of waste out of our atmosphere and on a path out of our galaxy would be massive.

        The Saturn 5 Rocket (the one that got us to the moon - Apollo 11)) punched out about 7 million pounds of thrust on launch (a jumbo produces about 24,000 pounds of thrust) and chewed thru about twenty tonnes of fuel per second, and got to about 30,000kph to escape the earth's pull. . . . the most amazing piece of kit ever produced I reckon:). Mate, if you ever have some spare time do a bit of research on the Saturn rockets - truly incredible feat of engineering.

        This was all to get a little capsule out into space and heading toward the moon - imagine how much grunt it would take to push a dirty big waste container out there. 

        Good idea though - I reckon you should patent it. There's a new "heavy lift rocket" called the Falcon Heavy which can get about 50 tonnes of payload into low orbit, or about 10 tonnes further out - but that's nowhere near enough..

        Although I'm sure there's aliens out there somewhere that are doin' it already...

      • I have an answer for you. Like Willy Wonkers machine that shrinks. If we can shrink everything from the current size to less than 1mm in size then we could easily manage our waste better or just like third world countries just burn it all daily instead of having rubbish bins. If you are old enough to remember back in the day thats what every country did. They just burnt it all.

        Climate Change is real however everyone trying to spunge off it financially is a problem. However if we can contine to develop and grow our solar and wind we will be more sustainable. Also if we nuked a few countries. China and India and America come to mind. We would rid the planet of 3 Billion people. Im down for that first then we can rebuild without all these problems.

        • The problem with solar and wind is that they both need more carbon to make than they’re worth . 

This reply was deleted.

Latest comments

Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐 replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Your best 19 vs Storm
"Thats a good side bem. Joash looked more confident and stronger in the trials, and his quick footwork really confused the opposition. If he's on the bench he needs to get onto the park"
9 minutes ago
Yehez replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Your best 19 vs Storm
"Iongi; JAC, Russell, Penisini, Simonsson; Pezet, Moses;
Hopgood, Smith, Paulo; Williams, Kautoga; Doorey. 
Bench: Da Silva, Tuivati, De Belin, Walker, Samrani, Papalii. "
1 hour ago
BEM replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Your best 19 vs Storm

1. Iongi 
2. JAC
3. Russell 
4. Penisini
5. Simo 
6. Papali'i 
7. Moses
8. Paulo 
9. Smith
10. Williams 
11. Tuilagi 
12. Kautoga 
13. Hopgood
14. Walker
15. Tuivaiti
16. Dorey
17. Samrani 
18. Da Silva "
1 hour ago
LB replied to Roy tannous's discussion Matto most likely gonna medically retire
"Pappy as in Papenhuyzen? When we have Iongi signed til 2030?"
1 hour ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Roy tannous's discussion Matto most likely gonna medically retire
"huh?...do wkat now?"
2 hours ago
Make Parra Great Again replied to Roy tannous's discussion Matto most likely gonna medically retire
"once he is retired, Pappy comes in into take his top 30 spot... u heard it here first"
2 hours ago
ParraPride replied to Roy tannous's discussion Matto most likely gonna medically retire
"Get rid of him!"
2 hours ago
LB replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Your best 19 vs Storm
"But how long is he willing to give himself? If Smith is still starting by the end of 2027 and he is extended with intent to start in 2028, what will Da Silva do then?I would love to know if Ryles intent is for Da Silva to eventually be the starting…"
3 hours ago
LB replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Your best 19 vs Storm
"I saw TDS try to pressure the kicker at times last night but not as consistent or forceful as Smith.
I love your analogy of how TDS read his own hype and thinks he can just play and be amazing. Where Smith is the opposite where he has had to grind…"
3 hours ago
TolEllts replied to Blue Eel's discussion Trial #2, Game Day Blog v Roosters: We Just Won the Pre-Season Cup
"EA, you have a keen eye for players especially those with with real potentials. Appreciate your updates on our juniors."
3 hours ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Roy tannous's discussion Matto most likely gonna medically retire
"You're a good man. I salute your empathy and offer of practical help for the disabled"
3 hours ago
Randy Handlinger replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Your best 19 vs Storm
"He is also a fast learner apparently"
3 hours ago
Coryn Hughes replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Your best 19 vs Storm
"That's the thing for me the game got away from us when TDS came into the game.
When Smith finished the game you saw defensively the ruck tighten back up and the service and attack clicked into gear.
I'm definitely on the fence with TDS potential is…"
3 hours ago
Angry Eel replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Your best 19 vs Storm
"I'm not trying to dump on TDS. Injustice thinks he's spent too much time on the bench playing Robin to Api and now Riley, he's needs a bit of time playing Batman again "
3 hours ago
LB replied to Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐's discussion Your best 19 vs Storm
"I personally prefer one Hooker and have a Utility that can play Hooker. Now with 6 man bench you can do that every week in case of injury.
I can see Ryles sticking with 2 but then maybe by mid year relying on one."
3 hours ago
Eelovution replied to Roy tannous's discussion Matto most likely gonna medically retire
"I will drive him to the neurologist to make sure he gets there on time."
4 hours ago
More…

Keaon done deal

As of Thursday, December 11, 2025, South Sydney Rabbitohs forwardKeaon Koloamatangi has reportedly agreed to a deal with the Parramatta Eels, but it is not yet officially announced by the clubs.  Soon to be announced.

Read more…
14 Replies · Reply by Poppa Jan 9
Views: 2099

 

Melbourne's Matterson offer

So it becomes more clearer, the $300k offered from Melbourne included $211,000 of that going towards Matterson's contract and $89,000 as a transfer fee. Instead of what we thought of $300k transfer fee and maybe taking Matto as well. So many felt…

Read more…
5 Replies · Reply by Randy Handlinger 13 hours ago
Views: 887

<script src="https://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js"></script>
<!-- Sidebar -->
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<script>// <![CDATA[
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
// ]]></script>