Bush Regime Tells Nasa to Destroy Hubble 1-22-2005

[dmcowen674]

1-22-2005 White House cuts Hubble fix-up funds - NASA told to focus on destroying telescope safely

WASHINGTON - The White House has eliminated funding for a mission to service the Hubble Space Telescope from its 2006 budget request and directed NASA to focus solely on deorbiting the popular spacecraft at the end of its life, according to government and industry sources.

 

[CycloWizard]

There's already a replacement for Hubble that will be launched fairly soon. This has been the plan for at least a decade. Next anti-Bush rant, please.

 

[yllus]

Topic Title: Bush Regime Tells Nasa to Destroy Hubble 1-22-2005
Topic Summary: P&N Eitists more rejoicing

lol

 

[SuperTool]

How about they destroy the Shuttles instead of wasting money servicing them. Hubble has been a highly successful project, which is more than can be said for Space Shuttle.

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: SuperTool
How about they destroy the Shuttles instead of wasting money servicing them. Hubble has been a highly successful project, which is more than can be said for Space Shuttle.

How could Hubble have been successful without the shuttles?

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

Originally posted by: SuperTool
How about they destroy the Shuttles instead of wasting money servicing them. Hubble has been a highly successful project, which is more than can be said for Space Shuttle.

How could Hubble have been successful without the shuttles?

I know.... we can use a giant slingshot right from the White House. Yeehaww!!!

Ok, I'm in a goofy mood.

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

Originally posted by: SuperTool
How about they destroy the Shuttles instead of wasting money servicing them. Hubble has been a highly successful project, which is more than can be said for Space Shuttle.

How could Hubble have been successful without the shuttles?

Well, that is one of the missions that Shuttle is good for which is in orbit servicing. But if they aren't gonna service the Hubble, why keep that money pit Shuttle flying?

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: SuperTool

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

Originally posted by: SuperTool
How about they destroy the Shuttles instead of wasting money servicing them. Hubble has been a highly successful project, which is more than can be said for Space Shuttle.

How could Hubble have been successful without the shuttles?

Well, that is one of the missions that Shuttle is good for which is in orbit servicing. But if they aren't gonna service the Hubble, why keep that money pit Shuttle flying?

To put Hubble's replacement up and service it?

 

[SuperTool]

Well, it says in the article, the servicing costs in excess of 1Billion. How much does building a replacement hubble cost?

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: SuperTool
Well, it says in the article, the servicing costs in excess of 1Billion. How much does building a replacement hubble cost?

I think way back when, the Hubble cost much more than $1billion.... I'll look it up.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: SuperTool
Well, it says in the article, the servicing costs in excess of 1Billion. How much does building a replacement hubble cost?

I think way back when, the Hubble cost much more than $1billion.... I'll look it up.

According to the NASA website, Hubble originally cost $1.5 billion to launch.

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: SuperTool
Well, it says in the article, the servicing costs in excess of 1Billion. How much does building a replacement hubble cost?

I think way back when, the Hubble cost much more than $1billion.... I'll look it up.

According to the NASA website, Hubble originally cost $1.5 billion to launch.

What's included in that? Just the launch or telescope+launch?

 

[raildogg]

This is tragic news. The one was one of mans greatest inventions ever, it should not end like this.

We can and must do something to save the Hubble. Join with me.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: SuperTool
Well, that is one of the missions that Shuttle is good for which is in orbit servicing. But if they aren't gonna service the Hubble, why keep that money pit Shuttle flying?

The primary purpose of shuttles is to conduct experiments in space. Quite a few useful results have been discovered through such experiments.

Hubble isn't going to be taken out of service before it's told us everything it can. Its limited focal length and so on limit its utility beyond what it's shown us already. Its replacement will have updated electronics that will allow much higher resolutions and such so we can see things in greater detail at greater distances. I believe it was discussed in the latest PopSci.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: raildogg
This is tragic news. The one was one of mans greatest inventions ever, it should not end like this.

We can and must do something to save the Hubble. Join with me.

What??? It's not any different than America going by the wayside.

 

[RabidMongoose]

I believe that the James Webb Space Telescope is expected to go up a few years after Hubble is gone. It's supposed to be a general replacement for the Hubble with better features, although it will not be a complete 100% replacement.

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: SuperTool
Well, that is one of the missions that Shuttle is good for which is in orbit servicing. But if they aren't gonna service the Hubble, why keep that money pit Shuttle flying?

The primary purpose of shuttles is to conduct experiments in space. Quite a few useful results have been discovered through such experiments.

Hubble isn't going to be taken out of service before it's told us everything it can. Its limited focal length and so on limit its utility beyond what it's shown us already. Its replacement will have updated electronics that will allow much higher resolutions and such so we can see things in greater detail at greater distances. I believe it was discussed in the latest PopSci.

There not launching a teloscope that truely replaces the Hubble. The new one will not have all the same instremetnts and is designed to take other pictures. That said I think it is time to let Hubble die. It would be better to build and launch a new teloscpoce then fix hubble.

 

[fornax]

Sad news indeed. In line with the anti-science policy of the modern Republican Taliban. Why should we study the skies? Everything we need to know is already in the Bible.

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: fornax
Sad news indeed. In line with the anti-science policy of the modern Republican Taliban. Why should we study the skies? Everything we need to know is already in the Bible.

I thought the Republicans were big supporters of NASA... lots of NASA centers are in Republican-leaning states.

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

Originally posted by: fornax
Sad news indeed. In line with the anti-science policy of the modern Republican Taliban. Why should we study the skies? Everything we need to know is already in the Bible.

I thought the Republicans were big supporters of NASA... lots of NASA centers are in Republican-leaning states.

I think the launching is done from the snow for more pradical reason like shuttles don't like landing in snow and it is closer to the equator.

 

[Jassi]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

Originally posted by: fornax
Sad news indeed. In line with the anti-science policy of the modern Republican Taliban. Why should we study the skies? Everything we need to know is already in the Bible.

I thought the Republicans were big supporters of NASA... lots of NASA centers are in Republican-leaning states.

They do support sattelites that carry weapons. Anything that is a waste is supported, everything scientific will be cut.

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: Jassi

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

Originally posted by: fornax
Sad news indeed. In line with the anti-science policy of the modern Republican Taliban. Why should we study the skies? Everything we need to know is already in the Bible.

I thought the Republicans were big supporters of NASA... lots of NASA centers are in Republican-leaning states.

They do support sattelites that carry weapons. Anything that is a waste is supported, everything scientific will be cut.

Satellites that carry weapons???

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: Spencer278

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

Originally posted by: fornax
Sad news indeed. In line with the anti-science policy of the modern Republican Taliban. Why should we study the skies? Everything we need to know is already in the Bible.

I thought the Republicans were big supporters of NASA... lots of NASA centers are in Republican-leaning states.

I think the launching is done from the snow for more pradical reason like shuttles don't like landing in snow and it is closer to the equator.

I'm talking about NASA centers, not only where the shuttle lands (which I believe is FL and CA).

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: Spencer278

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: SuperTool
Well, that is one of the missions that Shuttle is good for which is in orbit servicing. But if they aren't gonna service the Hubble, why keep that money pit Shuttle flying?

The primary purpose of shuttles is to conduct experiments in space. Quite a few useful results have been discovered through such experiments.

Hubble isn't going to be taken out of service before it's told us everything it can. Its limited focal length and so on limit its utility beyond what it's shown us already. Its replacement will have updated electronics that will allow much higher resolutions and such so we can see things in greater detail at greater distances. I believe it was discussed in the latest PopSci.

There not launching a teloscope that truely replaces the Hubble. The new one will not have all the same instremetnts and is designed to take other pictures. That said I think it is time to let Hubble die. It would be better to build and launch a new teloscpoce then fix hubble.

I would agree with your assessment under normal circumstances but Bushites aren't that intelligent and truth is they really don't care about "basic science" unless it can be used to kill someone. As someone else noted, James Webb is a different instrument with different capabilities. It can certainly see farther (in distance and time) than Hubble . . . but here's the kicker . . . Webb may never make it to orbit . . . it may never record a useful image. Hubble has not only proven its utility, it's proven to be ungradeable.

From the earliest days, this administration has shown it's disdain for science . . . actually most intelligent pursuits in general. At least they aren't talking about the moon and Mars nonsense anymore.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
I would agree with your assessment under normal circumstances but Bushites aren't that intelligent and truth is they really don't care about "basic science" unless it can be used to kill someone. As someone else noted, James Webb is a different instrument with different capabilities. It can certainly see farther (in distance and time) than Hubble . . . but here's the kicker . . . Webb may never make it to orbit . . . it may never record a useful image. Hubble has not only proven its utility, it's proven to be ungradeable.

That was truly a jackass thing to say. Congratulations.