Author Topic: Bush wants to increase NASA's budget (Read 965 times)

Dowding · « **Reply #15 on:** February 03, 2003, 03:11:29 AM »

We can't get this planet right, it beats me why we would want to go shag up another one.

Those martians will love us... I'm sure we'll treat them with dignity and respect. Afterall, they only need to look at how we treat each other to see we are such a tremendous species to befriend.

On second thoughts, if I was an alien race looking at Earth, I wouldn't bother with getting shot down over Roswell, or stealing livestock for weird experiments. I'd nuke the whole damn place and maybe let the ants have a shot of running the show. I'm sure they couldn't balls it up as much as we have.

CyranoAH · « **Reply #16 on:** February 03, 2003, 04:18:08 AM »

Dowding, I think you are going where everybody goes... "why go to space when the earth is such a mess...?"

Do you really believe that if we didn't invest in space sciences the world would be a better place? No, sir.

Space Exploration is by itself out of its time... it's meant to be a window through which we can have a glance of a better future, an ideal.

Everybody knows that the money for space exploration has to be taken from somewhere else, that somewhere being the military... how bad can that be?

Daniel

Dowding · « **Reply #17 on:** February 03, 2003, 04:51:06 AM »

I appreciate what you are saying, Cyrano, but respectfully disagree.

Tell me, what has space science given us that terrestial science hasn't in the last 50 years?

A cure for cancer? Reduction in birth abnormalities? Provision of food-stuffs for the planet? Elimination of disease?

The new frontier of science is biology. This will become more apparent in the next few decades.

I've studied astrophysics, astronomy and all that jazz and at the end of it all I was left thinking it is a fine academic pursuit - similar to trying to calculate pi to a few million decimal places. Suitable for Star Trek idealists and eccentric academics.

A lot of the time people are attracted towards space exploration because they want to see perhaps where we came from and if we are alone. Noble and completely understandable ideals (I share them myself), but only slightly more realistic than a devout belief in the Christian creation story or the Hindu cycle of life and Caste system.

Personally, I don't think we are anywhere near advanced enough to even contemplate space exploration. We can't even feed a huge proportion of our planet and we're trying to set-up a permanent settlement on Mars? It's perverse to the point of absurdity.

I could only see it being worthwhile if, in the endeavour to reach out into our solar system, the US, China, Europe and Russia could be united to achieve it. But I'm not holding my breath. Therefore it will be large multi-nationals that fund space exploration, further bypassing any concept of democracy and centralising power to a select few. It will be a feudal system on a grand scale.

There will be no benefit to 99% of the Earth's population - but at least they can watch people play golf on the surface of Mars to take their mind off their empty stomachs or the catastrophic over-crowding.

CyranoAH · « **Reply #18 on:** February 03, 2003, 05:07:09 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dowding
Tell me, what has space science given us that terrestial science hasn't in the last 50 years?
A cure for cancer? Reduction in birth abnormalities? Provision of food-stuffs for the planet? Elimination of disease?

Well, with all due respect, I don't think that's a fair comparison... we are just becoming acquainted with life in space and the research possibilities are limited, while we have been experiencing with terrestrial sciences for more than 3000 years.

What can space exploration and research bring to us? For starters, hope.

Now, with years, decades, and centuries of expertise in space research... who knows? A cure for cancer? Why not? The body behaves differently in microgravity, and a proper study of the proliferation of cancer in microgravity can shed some light in finding ways to stop and destroy cancerous cells.

The thing is that if we don't try, we won't know.

As for understanding if we are all alone, the origin of the universe, etc... well, one step at a time

Daniel

Dowding · « **Reply #19 on:** February 03, 2003, 05:22:06 AM »

My patience is only limited to the extent of my lifetime.

X2Lee · « **Reply #20 on:** February 03, 2003, 05:41:46 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dowding
My patience is only limited to the extent of my lifetime.

Maybe if you have children your scope will broaden.

Dowding · « **Reply #21 on:** February 03, 2003, 06:27:15 AM »

Maybe. If I do have children, then there is a chance the any sons I have will be epileptic like myself. Apparently it is passed along the male line. I would much rather an applied science such as that which has developed gene therapy be pursued to find a 'cure' for my condition and then eliminate it from my genetic make-up. I personally think that would be a better thing to pass down to my descendants.

Perhaps one day, when the world is united and there is enough food to eat, people will be able to expand into space at such a rate as you wouldn't believe. Instead we now do it half-heartedly and it only becomes a priority when a political agenda allows it; meanwhile, we are isolated by ideology and encumbered by age old hatreds. Hardly a suitable foundation on which to start something as grand as space exploration.

But I hope I'm wrong.

Bodhi · « **Reply #22 on:** February 03, 2003, 07:57:23 AM »

I think NASA and all the governments of the world should appoint all the keyboard genius's on these forums to be their top advisors... then nothing would ever go wrong... seeings that we all know how to fix EVERYTHING!

Fatty · « **Reply #23 on:** February 03, 2003, 08:07:03 AM »

World looks good over here, so I'm all for going ahead. We just won't take any Brits.

Dowding · « **Reply #24 on:** February 03, 2003, 08:10:47 AM »

I don't think anyone is saying they know how to 'fix' anything, certainly not me. We were having a discussion here - I'm sorry that's not your thing Bodhi.

Yeah, the world looks just fine Fatty. Everything's peachy.

It's a shame that anyone with a contrary opinion has to become 'the enemy' around here. It would seem that many people are so insecure in their own views, they can't stand to hear anything that might challenge them. I must be anti-NASA now. Oh dear.

Fatty · « **Reply #25 on:** February 03, 2003, 09:34:15 AM »

The world has never been peachy dowding and it never will be, there will always be excuses to wallow in despair.

Batz · « **Reply #26 on:** February 03, 2003, 09:50:12 AM »

Animal theres no they be to Mars already. The Russian guy that spent 14 months in orbit had to have extensive rehabilitation. He lost bone mass and was terrible shape. Even some of the unmanned probes sent to mars never made it.

The technology isnt there to get to Mars. The shuttle isnt about exploring space. Most exploration that takes comes from here on the surface and by satelites and probes. The shuttle doesnt have much to explore is close orbit.

The money spent to keep the shuttle fleet up could be spent else and much better vehicle could be produced. This would free up monies for the other projects.

The US could have used the money over the years to have a working space station or worked to develope an out post on the moon.

The shuttle never lived up to what it was supposed be.

I am all for the space program but that doesnt mean that NASA should get a blank check. They should be held accountable as to how they spend the taxpayers money.

The shuttle program is to costly and there are viable alternatives that could be produced cheaper.

Animal · « **Reply #27 on:** February 03, 2003, 10:14:03 AM »

Research on bone and muscle deterioration in zero g has been going for a while now. Those problems can be solved with modern biology.
Theres one big contribution of space exploration, this research could really help people with bone and muscle problems.

The real big problem with going to mars is psychology. We dont know how the human mind will react in such long voyages. Thats one of the nice things about the space station, it works as a lab to examine human response to that extreme enviroment. It simply cant be reproduced on earth.

The reason the space program is not giving as many real world results as Dowding would love to see is because there is simply not enough money to do all the experiments that the world science comunity would like to do. If they had the money to carry out all these experiments, the world would be a more advanced, better place.

But, some thing that the best way to solve the earth's problems is to get stuck here with a bleeding heart pouring money into the military, maybe the B-2 and the F-22 will make the world a better place.

Sadly, decent research in space will not take place until private corporations find a way to earn a lot of money from it. Be it with space tourism, space mining, or whatever they cant think of.

Batz · « **Reply #28 on:** February 03, 2003, 11:07:09 AM »

Research has been going on yes, its going on right now in the space station. But all the answers havent found. Given current knowledge theres no way we could have been to mars already.

Secondly there no real need to get to Mars before the technologies there. We can send remote vehicles to explore. There no need to waste money trying to force a manned mission to mars until we are ready.

NASA doesnt need more money. They could free up money getting rid of the shutlles. All those experiments performed on the shuttle could be automated and preformed in a much cheaper vehicle. The Isreali was studying the effects of Sahara dusts storms on weather patterns. Those patterns have studied been by satelites.

A cheaper more specialized vehicle frees up money.

CyranoAH · « **Reply #29 on:** February 03, 2003, 11:48:30 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Batz
A cheaper more specialized vehicle frees up money.

X-33.

Daniel