Nasa going to cut extended programs???

[sao123]

space.com


Many of Nasa's programs are outliving their projected lifetimes. Yes this is causing budget strains. But how does one cut off continued programs which are still producing live valuable scientific data.

1)Hubble (duh)
2)Voyager 1&2
3)Mars Rovers
4)Cassini Probe
etc...

on one hand one needs to keep running programs active, but yet one must also look toward the future and develop new programs. I say we give Nasa a $1 Trillion budget.
('im kidding of course) but what do you think?

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

We gotta plant some taxpayer dollars on the Moon and Mars!

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: sao123

Many of Nasa's programs are outliving their projected lifetimes. Yes this is causing budget strains.

But how does one cut off continued programs which are still producing live valuable scientific data.

1)Hubble (duh)
2)Voyager 1&2
3)Mars Rovers
4)Cassini Probe
etc...

Hello, the folks running the show now do not believe in Science.

 

[CaptnKirk]

Tax Form -

I would like $ 1 / $ 2 / $ 3 (Choose one) of my income tax witholdings to go to the
general funding for Space Programs.

I work in 'The Industry' - so I would option for even more if it was allowed.
( $ 10 Self - $ 10 Spouse )

If it wasn't for NASA we never would have come up with all that delicious Teflon.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Tax Form -

I would like $ 1 / $ 2 / $ 3 (Choose one) of my income tax witholdings to go to the
general funding for Space Programs.

I work in 'The Industry' - so I would option for even more if it was allowed.
( $ 10 Self - $ 10 Spouse )

If it wasn't for NASA we never would have come up with all that delicious Teflon.

I have never checked the boxes on the Tax form but I would if the Space program option was on there. :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

 

[SuperTool]

Gotta make room for those estate tax cuts.

 

[Crimson]

Originally posted by: sao123
space.com


Many of Nasa's programs are outliving their projected lifetimes. Yes this is causing budget strains. But how does one cut off continued programs which are still producing live valuable scientific data.

1)Hubble (duh)
2)Voyager 1&2
3)Mars Rovers
4)Cassini Probe
etc...

on one hand one needs to keep running programs active, but yet one must also look toward the future and develop new programs. I say we give Nasa a $1 Trillion budget.
('im kidding of course) but what do you think?

And this is why spending in our country can never been reigned in.. because people SAY they want it, but when its actually done they scream and kick. Hubble, for example, has already been discussed.. it would cost too much and provide too little benefit to keep it in service. A replacement is being built already which will far exceed Hubble's capabilities.

That being said, I WOULD support increasing NASA's budget.. But cutting programs which are offering less than its costing to keep them open just makes sense.

 

[Deptacon]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: sao123

Many of Nasa's programs are outliving their projected lifetimes. Yes this is causing budget strains.

But how does one cut off continued programs which are still producing live valuable scientific data.

1)Hubble (duh)
2)Voyager 1&2
3)Mars Rovers
4)Cassini Probe
etc...

Hello, the folks running the show now do not believe in Science.

ilove you random hate posts....

they make all the rest of your posts that much more insignificant

 

[Deptacon]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Tax Form -

I would like $ 1 / $ 2 / $ 3 (Choose one) of my income tax witholdings to go to the
general funding for Space Programs.

I work in 'The Industry' - so I would option for even more if it was allowed.
( $ 10 Self - $ 10 Spouse )

If it wasn't for NASA we never would have come up with all that delicious Teflon.

Nasa didnt come up with teflon, it was found by acciendent by Dupont

 

[artikk]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: sao123

Many of Nasa's programs are outliving their projected lifetimes. Yes this is causing budget strains.

But how does one cut off continued programs which are still producing live valuable scientific data.

1)Hubble (duh)
2)Voyager 1&2
3)Mars Rovers
4)Cassini Probe
etc...

Hello, the folks running the show now do not believe in Science.

I really like when you generalize, Dave. Tons of scientists like Albert Einstein and others believed in God. I presented proof for my argument. Where's yours?

 

[MonkeyK]

Originally posted by: russianpower

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: sao123

Many of Nasa's programs are outliving their projected lifetimes. Yes this is causing budget strains.

But how does one cut off continued programs which are still producing live valuable scientific data.

1)Hubble (duh)
2)Voyager 1&2
3)Mars Rovers
4)Cassini Probe
etc...

Hello, the folks running the show now do not believe in Science.

I really like when you generalize, Dave. Tons of scientists like Albert Einstein and others believed in God. I presented proof for my argument. Where's yours?

Is Albert Einstein running the show?

 

[artikk]

Originally posted by: MonkeyK

Originally posted by: russianpower

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: sao123

Many of Nasa's programs are outliving their projected lifetimes. Yes this is causing budget strains.

But how does one cut off continued programs which are still producing live valuable scientific data.

1)Hubble (duh)
2)Voyager 1&2
3)Mars Rovers
4)Cassini Probe
etc...

Hello, the folks running the show now do not believe in Science.

I really like when you generalize, Dave. Tons of scientists like Albert Einstein and others believed in God. I presented proof for my argument. Where's yours?

Is Albert Einstein running the show?

No, but I wouldn't generalize that republicans running the show don't believe in Science either.

 

[CaptnKirk]

Teflon is your friend

Did you miss the sarcasm in my post about it being delicious ?
Maybe it's the Tang that NASA didn't invent either was the 'Delicious' stuff.

You know what - NASA doesn't invent anything - they're a federally funded contract manager that pays others,
under contract, to perform research, and perform other work for their end use.

 

[MonkeyK]

Originally posted by: russianpower

Originally posted by: MonkeyK

Originally posted by: russianpower

I really like when you generalize, Dave. Tons of scientists like Albert Einstein and others believed in God. I presented proof for my argument. Where's yours?

Is Albert Einstein running the show?

No, but I wouldn't generalize that republicans running the show don't believe in Science either.

So then you presented neither proof nor argument.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: MonkeyK

Originally posted by: russianpower

Originally posted by: MonkeyK

Originally posted by: russianpower
I really like when you generalize, Dave. Tons of scientists like Albert Einstein and others believed in God. I presented proof for my argument. Where's yours?

Is Albert Einstein running the show?

No, but I wouldn't generalize that republicans running the show don't believe in Science either.

So then you presented neither proof nor argument.

Bahahaha :thumbsup: :thumbsup: Mike

 

[bsobel]

Hello, the folks running the show now do not believe in Science.

Gawd, isn't it about time for another rampage about how your never posting here again? Not particularrly relevent to the thread, but neither are your comments (ever)

Bill

 

[impeachbush]

Originally posted by: Crimson

Originally posted by: sao123
space.com


Many of Nasa's programs are outliving their projected lifetimes. Yes this is causing budget strains. But how does one cut off continued programs which are still producing live valuable scientific data.

1)Hubble (duh)
2)Voyager 1&2
3)Mars Rovers
4)Cassini Probe
etc...

on one hand one needs to keep running programs active, but yet one must also look toward the future and develop new programs. I say we give Nasa a $1 Trillion budget.
('im kidding of course) but what do you think?

And this is why spending in our country can never been reigned in.. because people SAY they want it, but when its actually done they scream and kick. Hubble, for example, has already been discussed.. it would cost too much and provide too little benefit to keep it in service. A replacement is being built already which will far exceed Hubble's capabilities.

That being said, I WOULD support increasing NASA's budget.. But cutting programs which are offering less than its costing to keep them open just makes sense.

I agree with most of what you say. More money for space exploration, less for space militarization. I was blown away after seeing the full color pictures taken on the surface of mars (by the rovers). Pretty impressive. If you haven't seen any, here's a few color panarama shots at lower resolution. I don't think yall would appreciate linking to pics at 50mb in size :0.
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/..._pubeng_bonnevillecolor-A071R1_br2.jpg
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/press/spirit/20050204a/PIA07334_br2.jpg
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/...ol454A_P2402_L257_false-A454R1_br2.jpg

1000's of pics can be found http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/ if your really bored..

 

[K1052]

I'd guess this is a ploy to get more cash out of congress.

They would never axe the Mars rovers, Cassini, and Voager progams while they are still operable. Hubble will have to be de-orbited relatively soon as a $1 billion repair mission would be required to service it.

 

[HombrePequeno]

Originally posted by: K1052
I'd guess this is a ploy to get more cash out of congress.

They would never axe the Mars rovers, Cassini, and Voager progams while they are still operable. Hubble will have to be de-orbited relatively soon as a $1 billion repair mission would be required to service it.

I wouldn't say that Voyager is really 'operating' right now. All we're doing with them right now is tracking where they are. It would be nice to track them until the Oort Cloud but that starts to get expensive.

I do agree that it wouldn't make sense to kill the Mars rover and Cassini programs though.

 

[TRUMPHENT]

Originally posted by: Deptacon

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Tax Form -

I would like $ 1 / $ 2 / $ 3 (Choose one) of my income tax witholdings to go to the
general funding for Space Programs.

I work in 'The Industry' - so I would option for even more if it was allowed.
( $ 10 Self - $ 10 Spouse )

If it wasn't for NASA we never would have come up with all that delicious Teflon.

Nasa didnt come up with teflon, it was found by acciendent by Dupont

True! NASA was able to prove that Teflon burned with a vengence in the vacuum of space!

 

[Bombastic Flasher]

aren't we in national debt
but still we want to go to mars and explore planets that have no hope of sustaining life

 

[HombrePequeno]

Originally posted by: Bombastic Flasher
aren't we in national debt
but still we want to go to mars and explore planets that have no hope of sustaining life

Mars has a decent chance of sustaining life. Do you not think figuring out the mysteries of the solar system is worth your money?

Spending money to gain scientific knowledge is a hell of a lot better than spending it on some welfare whore.

 

[slash196]

Since Mars has no magnetic field, life is pretty much unsustainable there. At least, human life. Our DNA would be torn to shreds by radiation.

 

[MonkeyK]

Originally posted by: HombrePequeno

Originally posted by: Bombastic Flasher
aren't we in national debt
but still we want to go to mars and explore planets that have no hope of sustaining life

Mars has a decent chance of sustaining life. Do you not think figuring out the mysteries of the solar system is worth your money?

Spending money to gain scientific knowledge is a hell of a lot better than spending it on some welfare whore.

We could spend the money to make renewable energy a reality.

 

[CaptnKirk]

Originally posted by: Bombastic Flasher
aren't we in national debt
but still we want to go to mars and explore planets that have no hope of sustaining life

Why not - there seems to be a lack if inteligent life forms on this one.