Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Karnak on February 02, 2003, 09:32:07 PM
-
Linkage:
Bush wants more money for NASA (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/02/02/bush.budget.nasa.reut/index.html)
Now many (most?) of you are aware that I think Bush is a horrible President and has been an utter disaster for our nation, but...
Thank you President Bush. I hope you can get it trough Congress.
-
Why is this a good thing?
-
wow if this is true then my respect for him has gone from complete moron to just a boob.
crossing my fingers that it is true.
-
it may very likely be just a spin in order to boost ratings for the election. Granted, ANY President ,regardless of affiliation would do the same thing. If it came from the heart then I have to respect it.
-
I think its very good hes trying to increase their budgets, hey I mean they are still using 30 year old space ships with 30 year old computers!!! not surprising what happened yesterday happened!
Money too often comes before safety, and in nasa's buisness thats something they cant afford not to afford!
Bush isn't the best president we ever had when it comes to econimey but hey, I'd hate to see the US if Al Gore got elected!!! :eek:
-
just looked at the increasen, 500million....... seems like alot right? well one f-22 cost 200million. figure that out. its now down from boob to pandering boob.
-
500 million is an awful lot for what it is intended to do...
REhire most of the techs that care for the shuttles in between flights which were layed off during Clinton's wanton budget cuts of teh military and space program.
-
they need a new space plane entirely, 500million will be enough to fund the development maybe.
-
frog is right , they need a new type of space plane and a new launch system, getting lifted into orbit from the ground by massive rockets is last century, they need to go back to the old Dyna-soar project they were working on before JFK started the "race to the moon".
the computers on the shuttles have been upgraded , they are not 30 years old.
-
Originally posted by Frogm4n
just looked at the increasen, 500million....... seems like alot right? well one f-22 cost 200million. figure that out. its now down from boob to pandering boob.
its not bad considering what NASA watch has to say
http://www.reston.com/nasa/congress/10.30.98.rohra.html
-
With the deficit hole he's digging, certainly! Throw NASA in with the rest of it... We can make our grand children pay for it.
-
They ought to sell off the shuttle fleet and build a practical and cheaper vehicle.
The shuttle was built in expectation of carrying satelites from industry into space. Most of the experiments done on the shuttle could be done by automated systems. Or in a smaller more specialized vehicle.
Right now the shuttles only real use is taking astronauts to the space station.
Its been shown that NASA could do away with shuttle fleet altogether and reinvest that money in other projects and get a far better return.
The NASA budget increased by 600 million dollars each year over the past 2.
Throwing more money at NASA is kinds knee jerk if ya ask me. Especially since they havent found the cause of yesterdays accident.
-
Originally posted by john9001
frog is right , they need a new type of space plane and a new launch system, getting lifted into orbit from the ground by massive rockets is last century, they need to go back to the old Dyna-soar project they were working on before JFK started the "race to the moon".
the computers on the shuttles have been upgraded , they are not 30 years old.
Oh well they still old (at least i'm pretty sure) I don't study space craft and stuff much :)
-
shuttles were made to just take people to a space station, but nixon said one or the other. well you cant have a space station if you have nothing to fly people up there and back. well it started off small untill the cia came in and told them that it needed to have X amount of cargo space for there "special needs"or the funding would get cut. and the cost of the shuttle exploded from there on.
-
$500 mil. is table scraps for such a huge endeavor. :(
The thing about the space program is that you either support it fully or there will simply not be enough progress.
Had the goverment kept support just like they did in the cold war, we could very well be in Mars already.
But I gotta give props to Bush. Even $500 million can be a lot when there are MANY people in Washington who simply want to see the space program closed.
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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
-
My patience is only limited to the extent of my lifetime. ;)
-
Originally posted by Dowding
My patience is only limited to the extent of my lifetime. ;)
Maybe if you have children your scope will broaden.
-
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.
-
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!
:rolleyes:
-
World looks good over here, so I'm all for going ahead. We just won't take any Brits.
-
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.
-
The world has never been peachy dowding and it never will be, there will always be excuses to wallow in despair.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
Originally posted by Batz
A cheaper more specialized vehicle frees up money.
X-33.
Daniel
-
jeez you talk on and on about feeding the world. we have plenty of food to feed everyone. hell here in the states we pay farmers millions,damn rich farmers(shakes fist), not to raise cattle or grow food! the problem is transfering it to the needy, and around here that is called socialism. this is a bad word in the states so dont even mention that again.
-
Originally posted by Frogm4n
jeez you talk on and on about feeding the world. we have plenty of food to feed everyone. hell here in the states we pay farmers millions,damn rich farmers(shakes fist), not to raise cattle or grow food! the problem is transfering it to the needy, and around here that is called socialism. this is a bad word in the states so dont even mention that again.
Are you implying that because socialism is a bad word in the US that we don't in fact feed many in the world? I beg to differ, we have and will continue to help those in need, even after they've bitten the hand that feeds them.
-
oh i know we do our fair share of feeding the world, it just bothers me when people whine about socialism and how evil it is. We could do more that is for sure, but for someone to play the "world is hungry" card is just silly.
-
it's very sad, but I think this catastrophy will increase awareness on how undefunded NASA is. The budget for NASA was to be increased before it actually happened, I now hope that they will review it and give NASA even more money.
-
Dowding,
The space program has, thus far, generated far more money than it has cost.
Arguing that we should spend the paltry sum elsewhere is kind of silly. 15 billion dollars that fund NASA isn't going to make a huge difference when applied directly to the worlds problems. Even less so is the 3.4 billion dollars that are spent by NASA on space flight. It simply isn't that much money when talking about issues on the scale that you are.
-
his proposal for this monies for NASA was on the table long before this weekends accident .... not a knee jerk reaction to anything