NASA's new mission

unsung

This just doesn't get any better than this, now NASA is into foreign relations, what can't Hillary do her job?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07 ... s-muslims/

WaveCameCrashin

NASA should now stand for
No Americans in Space Anymore

Since Obama decided to get rid of the constalation program astronauts will now have to catch a ride with the Russians or Chinese
Thanks Mr. President

Shawshank

At the very least NASA has needed an overhaul for quite some time. Our genius in that department seemed to be phased out along with the Apollo program. I know they've done some cool stuff since then, but when you figure they were sending men to the moon and back successfully with about half the computing power my cell phone has, it's hard to get excited about orbital missions.

Got a hard hard head

I think any space missions will be put on the back burner for quite some time. I mean, can you imagine if any country spent billions on a space mission when the world is financially up shit creek?!

I'm not sure about integrating Muslims into the space program. The likelihood of meeting someone willing to be shot into space would probably be the same as that at an agrophobics meeting.

Jason P

NASA should be focused on new space probes and telescopes. This is the cheapest and most effective way to explore deep space.

Kel Varnsen

Jason P wrote:

NASA should be focused on new space probes and telescopes. This is the cheapest and most effective way to explore deep space.

Why does NASA always have to do everything on the super cheap. They already get less than 1% of the US federal budget and look at all the cool stuff the world gets for that. The small amount of money they get wouldn't really change anything it it went to the DoD or to Social Security or Medicare.

http://techtran.msfc.nasa.gov/at_home.html

Can you imagine if NASA even got a small chunk of the budget that goes to the US DoD or to the Global War on Terror? We would be living like the Jetsons.

arthurdent

Got a hard hard head wrote:

I think any space missions will be put on the back burner for quite some time. I mean, can you imagine if any country spent billions on a space mission when the world is financially up shit creek?!

that flawed argument is almost as old as NASA itself.


wikipedia:
On the eve of the Apollo 11 launch, July 15, 1969, Ralph David Abernathy arrived at Cape Canaveral with several hundred members of the poor people to protest spending of government space exploration, while many Americans remained poor. He was met by Thomas O. Paine, the Administrator of NASA, whom he told that in the face of such suffering, space flight represented an inhuman priority and funds should be spent instead to "feed the hungry, clothe the naked, tend the sick, and house the homeless." Mr. Paine told Abernathy that the advances in space exploration were child's play compared to the tremendously difficult human problems of the society, and told him that "if we could solve the problems of poverty by not pushing the button to launch men to the moon tomorrow, then we would not push that button." On the day of the launch, Dr. Abernathy led a small group of protesters to the restricted guest viewing area of the space center and chanted, "We are not astronauts, but we are people."

arthurdent

Kel Varnsen wrote:

Jason P wrote:

NASA should be focused on new space probes and telescopes. This is the cheapest and most effective way to explore deep space.

Why does NASA always have to do everything on the super cheap. They already get less than 1% of the US federal budget and look at all the cool stuff the world gets for that. The small amount of money they get wouldn't really change anything it it went to the DoD or to Social Security or Medicare.

It's because Americans have a pathetically short attention span when it comes to this sort of thing. Remember, we canceled 3 moon landings because of America's lack of interest/funding. The concept of "because it's there" is foreign to most people. They have no imagination.


*I have a piece of Gus Grissom's Liberty Bell 7 sitting on my desk*

BinauralJam

Kel Varnsen wrote:

Jason P wrote:

NASA should be focused on new space probes and telescopes. This is the cheapest and most effective way to explore deep space.

Why does NASA always have to do everything on the super cheap. They already get less than 1% of the US federal budget and look at all the cool stuff the world gets for that. The small amount of money they get wouldn't really change anything it it went to the DoD or to Social Security or Medicare.

http://techtran.msfc.nasa.gov/at_home.html

Can you imagine if NASA even got a small chunk of the budget that goes to the US DoD or to the Global War on Terror? We would be living like the Jetsons.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Got a hard hard head

arthurdent wrote:

Got a hard hard head wrote:

I think any space missions will be put on the back burner for quite some time. I mean, can you imagine if any country spent billions on a space mission when the world is financially up shit creek?!

that flawed argument is almost as old as NASA itself.


wikipedia:
On the eve of the Apollo 11 launch, July 15, 1969, Ralph David Abernathy arrived at Cape Canaveral with several hundred members of the poor people to protest spending of government space exploration, while many Americans remained poor. He was met by Thomas O. Paine, the Administrator of NASA, whom he told that in the face of such suffering, space flight represented an inhuman priority and funds should be spent instead to "feed the hungry, clothe the naked, tend the sick, and house the homeless." Mr. Paine told Abernathy that the advances in space exploration were child's play compared to the tremendously difficult human problems of the society, and told him that "if we could solve the problems of poverty by not pushing the button to launch men to the moon tomorrow, then we would not push that button." On the day of the launch, Dr. Abernathy led a small group of protesters to the restricted guest viewing area of the space center and chanted, "We are not astronauts, but we are people."

Don't get me wrong, it's not my argument. I actually think space exploration is very important. I just think there would be a bigger reaction than normal to it at present.

Whilst on the subject, does anyone know if the Mars Plane (ARES) mission has been scrapped or just delayed?

Jason P

Kel Varnsen wrote:

Jason P wrote:

NASA should be focused on new space probes and telescopes. This is the cheapest and most effective way to explore deep space.

Why does NASA always have to do everything on the super cheap. They already get less than 1% of the US federal budget and look at all the cool stuff the world gets for that. The small amount of money they get wouldn't really change anything it it went to the DoD or to Social Security or Medicare.

http://techtran.msfc.nasa.gov/at_home.html

Can you imagine if NASA even got a small chunk of the budget that goes to the US DoD or to the Global War on Terror? We would be living like the Jetsons.

I wasn't implying that they should get a budget reduction. I was more focused on spending the available budget on projects that are going to offer the most scientific value and insight to our universe. It is much easier, safer and feasible to send machines to explore rather then satisfying our egos buy building expensive shuttles.

I don't think NASA should scrap sending astronauts into space but I believe the shuttle program will be more effective if it is outsourced to a private firm.