In which the pond determines boldly doing nothing is the best bet for Mars, Sydney's second airport and blowing things up ...

(Above: the pond and others retain a sense of wonder as a laser interrogates some rocks on Mars, found here).

What an unhappy joyless world Chris Berg must inhabit.

Space: the final frontier. These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise. Its five-year mission: to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no man has gone before.

Let's overlook the sexism, it's the thought that counts.

But not in the world of Chris Berg and the IPA.

According to Berg, the eyes must be focussed on the mud below, not the stars above. Sure there's the right to smoke cigarettes until you kill yourself. That sort of choice, that sort of conspicuous consumption, that sort of billions and billions death machine is fine and dandy, and the bigger the better, the more the merrier.

Drinking as much as you like is also okay - it's sponsor approved.

But once you've pissed your cash against the wall on Brendan O'Neill approved brands, herded like hapless sheep by expensive advertising, there has to be savings.

Naturally doing nothing about climate science is a perfect opportunity to balance the budget. Then there's the chance to stomp on the childish dreams of Star Trek fans ...

And then there's the exquisite Bergian logic that Berg brings to the task:

The economist Robin Hanson, himself a former NASA researcher, has described the space program as ''mostly like the pyramids''. That is, it offers prestige, but it is showy and expensive and pointless.

Uh huh. We get the drift. It's too expensive and it's pointless. It's utterly pointless to show any interest in the world around us, and the world beyond, because ... well who wants to know. Just smoke and die ...

Just because Everest was there, there was no need for expensive mountain-climbing expeditions. And don't get the pond started on ridiculous super yachts or other extravagances of the super rich.

But it certainly is a monument. The moon landing will be forever tied to John F. Kennedy. Both Obama and George W. Bush tried to replicate JFK's legacy by promising to put humans on Mars, and soon. Surely they knew this was fantasy. There's no taste for an exotic and expensive space program in our austere century.

Yep, there's absolutely no point in flashing the cash in this austere century. Hapless Russian, American and Chinese billionaires have suffered enough.

There once was a political reason to be in space. Now there is not. Politicians need political reasons if they're going to pay for things. That's how democracy functions, and that's why NASA is lost.

Okay, okay, we get it, we get it, so we all live like hermits in one room cells. It's all too hard, and we're ruined, ruined I tells ya. No more brand-names, just home labels.

But hang on, what's this prancing over the hills? Why it's the private sector and capitalism come to save us. Good old Dick Smith joined together with Bill Gates and a host of others ...

... robotic missions are much cheaper than manned missions. Putting Curiosity on Mars cost little more than Victoria's myki ticketing system. The global research and philanthropic community should easily be able to raise that sort of money.

Easily? Like they've done in the past? And then comes the parenthetical caveat:

(Sounds far-fetched? Then perhaps our imagination needs to start on the ground before it can dance among the stars.)

Yep, keep looking at that mud, and keep smoking.

They'd probably be able to do it cheaper than the bloated, politicised, and hopelessly confused NASA anyway.

Yep, Berg's piece Mars? A mere Curiosity in days of thrift isn't really a study of the cost benefits of space exploration, and the benefits of a sense of wonder of the universe beyond the earth.

It's just another prime example of the IPA spouting "whatever two legged government does is bad", "just leave it to the wondrous four legged private sector good".

Berg's mind, logic and approach is so hopelessly skewed, it must make for a difficult night's sleep.

If the world were to adopt his Grinchian, 'we're broke, spend no more money on anything, and especially on government' approach, we'd soon enough have the economy in a tail spin.

Now if he'd taken the time to point out the enormous amount of money humanity pisses against the wall on arms manufacturing and war and blowing shit up, he might have made a decent point - especially given the way governments are front and centre in relation to that particular activity.

But I guess it depends on who the IPA's client list is on a given day. There's not much point in offending arms manufacturers when who knows, they might just be saving the world by thinking about the mud below, rather than the stars above.

Berg has grown increasingly strange in his arguments of late, and this outing is the latest rich sampling, whereby NASA shouldn't do anything, and nor should anyone else, except maybe the rich can do it, but why would they because it's pointless, but if they do, unlike government, then it'll be philanthropic and research-driven ... and never mind the contradictions, just keep smoking.

Such is his libertarian passion for free speech that Berg recently banged on at The Drum, denouncing John Howard, and the injustice done to Belal Khazaal for being jailed for publishing a guide to blowing things up and killing people.

After all, as Berg cogently explains in Sent to prison for making an ebook, he didn't actually kill anyone, he just published a guide on how to do it - terrorism for dummies, prepared, it has to be admitted, by a dummy.

This is good news for the pond, because somewhere lurking in the house is a battered copy of The Anarchist Cookbook. (And it's freely available online too, if you know how to google, as Berg points out).

The original publication can still be had from Google, but only after you get past this note from its original author, William Powell, explaining he was young at the time and angry and now repented and no longer believed in violence as an acceptable means to bring about political change:

Unfortunately, the book continues to be in print and with the advent of the Internet several websites dealing with it have emerged. I want to state categorically that I am not in agreement with the contents of The Anarchist Cookbook and I would be very pleased (and relieved) to see its publication discontinued. I consider it to be a misguided and potentially dangerous publication which should be taken out of print.

Berg doesn't have any caveats of this kind.

Volokh concluded that much crime-facilitating speech is "dual-use". Speech which can facilitate crime can also inform non-criminals about risks, about issues of public importance (such as the vulnerability of key Australians to hammers), or even just entertain.

Yep, reading about blowing shit up is hugely entertaining.

A government should not ban speech that has a lawful and valuable use simply because it may also be used by criminals. Volokh argued that to the extent crime-facilitating speech has such value, it should be considered to be within the bounds of free speech.

Uh huh. Run that past Wikileaks again ...

Khazaal's ebook would fall easily within those bounds. Does Islamic theology demand violent jihad, and against whom? Khazaal has published his view. Know your enemy.

Except of course if your enemy has somehow managed to smuggle a dangerous concoction past security. Know your enemy at 35,000 feet doesn't have quite the same ring to it.

And it's hard to say there has been any great, compelling harm caused by his compilation. Words are cheap. The Anarchist Cookbook provides more technical detail than Khazaal offered, and is free to read across the internet.
Belal Khazaal may be a bad guy. He may deserve to be in prison. Australian courts decided he could not be regarded as "a person of good character" at sentencing because of convictions in Lebanon for donating to alleged terrorist organisations.

But if he deserves to be in prison in Australia, he deserves to be there for a greater crime than making an ebook.

Khazaal, apart from his desire to explain a variety of ways to kill Jews and Americans and other unbelievers, happened to be a Qantas baggage handler.

Here's hoping that the next Qantas baggage handler who gets a letch for blowing things up forms a fixation on the IPA.

Let's test the limits of free speech ...

And speaking of Qantas, the pond on a Monday usually pays particular attention to Paul Sheehan, but today he delivers up a shameless puff piece in praise of China Southern Airlines and Guangzhou, in Flying 'roo in danger of becoming roadkill.

The Chinese paid for the junket and lordy did they get their money's worth. Sheehan might not be cheap, but he sure knows how to deliver value.

Innocent bystanders might think they're involved in reading an act of journalism, but of course it's Sheehan on yet another junket - he does so love his junkets - is a sight to see, reporting on banquets attended, and making ludicrous comparisons between a country with a population of 1.2 billion and a country with a population around 23 million:

It (China Southern) is about to embark on constructing Airline City, a 10-year project that will cost well over a billion dollars. The centrepiece will be the airline's own university. Imagine the feeding frenzy of bureaucrats, lawyers and environmentalists if a project like this were proposed in Australia. Which is why nothing like this is envisaged in Australia.

Yes, it's got nothing to do with economic realities or practical business models, it's just the lawyers and the greenies getting in the road.

You couldn't pick a better pimp and spiv to write a puff piece for and about the Chinese, and the glories of their burgeoning aviation industry. Really.

And then there's this capper as Sheehan marvels at the expansion of Guangzhou's new airport:

...Sydney Airport is responding to the growth challenge with one hand tied behind its back, wrapped in red tape.

Uh huh. Offered the chance to respond to the challenge of growth in the sector, what does Sheehan conjure? A chance for Sydney to build a second airport, perhaps even a second city? A grand new solution, a veritable Opera House for planes that will be the marvel of the civilised world?

Nope. Get rid of a little red tape. Stick with what we've got. Roll back the curfew hours. That'll fix it.

If it wasn't such a structural tragedy, it would be comedy gold. No wonder Australia's fucked.

Sheehan as a junketing business reporter? How Fairfax has fallen on hard times.

Never mind, I'm sure Sheehan and Bazza O'Farrell can get together and sort out everything.

At a time when some stories are doing the rounds complaining about London's 'ridiculous' new airport - 80 km from the city, Bazza's grand vision is for Sydney's next airport to be based in Canberra - 236 km by air, and 287 km by road. That's not ridiculous, that's downright hysterical. And all Sheehan's got to offer, up against his visions of China rampant, is blather about red tape.

It's the vision of a gnat.

Maybe it's time for the pond to pack up and head for China ... or Mars ... or at least go boldly where gnats don't hold down newspaper column inches ...

(Below: the muddle-headed wombat dreams of Canberra).