Obama tells NASA "Don't reach for the Moon"

[herm0016]

fringe science!!!??? do none of you realize we would not have 1/2 the technology today if the space program had not been started? hundred of the things we use everyday came from the space program. its not just about the going there, its developing the tech to do it.

 

[bozack]

Democrats have historically cut funding to NASA, I remember when I was working there that the Clinton days were not enjoyed...no surprise that Obama is following suit.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: herm0016
fringe science!!!??? do none of you realize we would not have 1/2 the technology today if the space program had not been started? hundred of the things we use everyday came from the space program. its not just about the going there, its developing the tech to do it.

Like I said, it has its place.

 

[PottedMeat]

I don't really care all that much for manned space exploration right now. I do like the idea of developing technology for very heavy inexpensive lift capacity as well as remote manufacturing/fuel production in space. From that you could build whatever telescopes you want. We've already got a modular space station ( heh how many revisions has it gone through - it's kind of a frankenstein ) and it can be supplied with cheap Soyuz flights.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: herm0016
fringe science!!!??? do none of you realize we would not have 1/2 the technology today if the space program had not been started? hundred of the things we use everyday came from the space program. its not just about the going there, its developing the tech to do it.

Like I said, it has its place.

Unfortunately "fringe" science is responsible for virtually all you enjoy today. Perhaps you aren't in this category, but there are many who want only development, not research, or if they have research only on things that will pan out. That's akin to buying lottery tickets that only win.

 

[ebaycj]

Originally posted by: bozack
Democrats have historically cut funding to NASA, I remember when I was working there that the Clinton days were not enjoyed...no surprise that Obama is following suit.

That is because they were being pragmatic with the budget. Unfortunately, NASA is very high (possibly at the top of) the "really nice to have" list, but cannot under any circumstances be qualified as an "absolute necessity".

I personally love science, science fiction, engineering, new technology, etc., and there is no doubt that NASA is basically a factory producing those things.

However, we need to get our shit in line. We need to get things running here on earth before we can/should reach for the stars.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: freshgeardude
Yet another thing Obama is planning to do that no one likes. good job voting for him. He IS ruining the American dream. and this is another one, because when I finish high school and college, I want to become an astronaut, and he wants to take away my dream!

OK Joe the Astronaut. Here is you cookie, if you shove it far enough up your butt maybe you'll reach LEO.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: ebaycj
That is because they were being pragmatic with the budget. Unfortunately, NASA is very high (possibly at the top of) the "really nice to have" list, but cannot under any circumstances be qualified as an "absolute necessity".

I personally love science, science fiction, engineering, new technology, etc., and there is no doubt that NASA is basically a factory producing those things.

However, we need to get our shit in line. We need to get things running here on earth before we can/should reach for the stars.

Honestly I disagree, simply because the laundry list of things that need to be dealt with under a democratic regime will never end, everything like socialized healthcare, bigger govt programs, and what not will always take precidence to the likes of NASA. I am a big supporter of having a healthy space budget simply because it is cutting edge aand a direction we should be headed.

 

[tvarad]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: herm0016
fringe science!!!??? do none of you realize we would not have 1/2 the technology today if the space program had not been started? hundred of the things we use everyday came from the space program. its not just about the going there, its developing the tech to do it.

Like I said, it has its place.

Unfortunately "fringe" science is responsible for virtually all you enjoy today. Perhaps you aren't in this category, but there are many who want only development, not research, or if they have research only on things that will pan out. That's akin to buying lottery tickets that only win.

NASA was able to make such spin-off breakthroughs when it had to reach the goal of putting a man on the moon before 1970 and ahead of the Russians. But no such time-bound goal has been mandated since. The only one is a woolly aim of maintaining a manned U.S. presence in space. And NASA is simply putting on a late-night "greatest hits" informercial with it's latest Ares/Constellation endeavor for it's post-Shuttle plan.

There are great things it's doing on the unmanned side with NASA's planetary missions. A lot of advances in robotics, communications etc are being made there.

 

[crisscross]

Originally posted by: ebaycj

Originally posted by: bozack
Democrats have historically cut funding to NASA, I remember when I was working there that the Clinton days were not enjoyed...no surprise that Obama is following suit.

That is because they were being pragmatic with the budget. Unfortunately, NASA is very high (possibly at the top of) the "really nice to have" list, but cannot under any circumstances be qualified as an "absolute necessity".

I personally love science, science fiction, engineering, new technology, etc., and there is no doubt that NASA is basically a factory producing those things.

However, we need to get our shit in line. We need to get things running here on earth before we can/should reach for the stars.

You do realize that an "ideal" situation where we get everything running perfectly and then concentrate is never ever going to happen there will always be things to do and you just have to multi task.

I live in India and we recently sent a mission to the moon and hey India has a LOT more things to fix when compared to the US and there was a lot of criticism about how the money could have been better spent in alleviating poverty but the truth is the space program is also driving a lot of kids to school. The city where the satellite launch center is located has kids with not enough money to eat now dreaming about studying and become scientists and has given them a purpose in life.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: winnar111
Makes sense. Now that the government is a health care factory, there's no money for Neil Armstrong moments.

Way to troll. Socialism is socialism. It doesn't matter if it's health care, space, or war.

Maybe so. But healthcare is much more expensive than war and space.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Most people have no idea of the benefits of NASA having full funding. There are so many technological advancements that we use every single day that were solely based on NASA experiments and/or research.

Cutting their budget when it is so piddly in the grand scheme of things is pretty ignorant of the research that is still producing results to this very day. If I went over the budget, I'd bet that I could come up with a minimum of 3 dozen programs that have a budget that is exponentially larger than NASA's that haven't benefited the population even a fraction as much.

Hell, the Pentagon LOST 70% OF NASA's ANNUAL BUDGET in Iraq and no one flinched. The auto bailout would fully fund NASA for a year and would produce better results. The TARP bailout would fund NASA for the next 41 years. Perspective people...perspective.

 

[Gibsons]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Most people have no idea of the benefits of NASA having full funding. There are so many technological advancements that we use every single day that were solely based on NASA experiments and/or research.

Cutting their budget when it is so piddly in the grand scheme of things is pretty ignorant of the research that is still producing results to this very day. If I went over the budget, I'd bet that I could come up with a minimum of 3 dozen programs that have a budget that is exponentially larger than NASA's that haven't benefited the population even a fraction as much.

Hell, the Pentagon LOST 70% OF NASA's ANNUAL BUDGET in Iraq and no one flinched. The auto bailout would fully fund NASA for a year and would produce better results. The TARP bailout would fund NASA for the next 41 years. Perspective people...perspective.

A few other points of information..

Total cost of NASA since '58, adjusted, is about 810 billion. Afghanistan + Iraq over 7 years, about 600 billion (yes, it's apples and oranges, but it does make NASAs budget seem pretty small).

NASAs current budget is about 0.6 percent of the 2008 budget.

link

As for the OP, the whole Ares go-to-the-moon project has seemed like a godawful waste of money to me. A patched together muckup with very high risk and low return. How many mars rovers, Cassinis, Hubbles, etc., could we get for that cost?

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Most people have no idea of the benefits of NASA having full funding. There are so many technological advancements that we use every single day that were solely based on NASA experiments and/or research.

Cutting their budget when it is so piddly in the grand scheme of things is pretty ignorant of the research that is still producing results to this very day. If I went over the budget, I'd bet that I could come up with a minimum of 3 dozen programs that have a budget that is exponentially larger than NASA's that haven't benefited the population even a fraction as much.

Hell, the Pentagon LOST 70% OF NASA's ANNUAL BUDGET in Iraq and no one flinched. The auto bailout would fully fund NASA for a year and would produce better results. The TARP bailout would fund NASA for the next 41 years. Perspective people...perspective.

QFT

 

[Brovane]

Originally posted by: ebaycj

Originally posted by: bozack
Democrats have historically cut funding to NASA, I remember when I was working there that the Clinton days were not enjoyed...no surprise that Obama is following suit.

That is because they were being pragmatic with the budget. Unfortunately, NASA is very high (possibly at the top of) the "really nice to have" list, but cannot under any circumstances be qualified as an "absolute necessity".

I personally love science, science fiction, engineering, new technology, etc., and there is no doubt that NASA is basically a factory producing those things.

However, we need to get our shit in line. We need to get things running here on earth before we can/should reach for the stars.

Here is a website listing some of the ways that NASA has advanced technology that has had real world benefits.

http://www.thespaceplace.com/nasa/spinoffs.html

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: alien42

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: alien42

Originally posted by: tvarad
And what are we going to do on the moon anyway? There is absolutely nothing compelling there that we should go back for, except for some shrill voices screaming about how the Chinese are going to get there before the U.S. (the U.S. has been there, done that, duh!).

actually the moon is an ideal place for a telescope that could make the Hubble look like a toy.

MIT is already working on it.

ANd there are some earth based telescopes being designed that would put hubble to shame as well. It would have been better to just let hubble fall out of sky and a send new better replacement up. But congress forced nasa to repair to it and more than it would have cost to build a new one....

the telescopic potential on the moon dwarfs that on earth due to the atmospheric difference.

You are no doubt correct, but these new earth based telescopes will be far more affordable than putting one on the moon.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Yeah, just let China, India, and Japan have it.

Then again, been there and done that. Let's take Mars!

 

[Throckmorton]

Smart scientific policy for the first time in a long time.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: winnar111
Makes sense. Now that the government is a health care factory, there's no money for Neil Armstrong moments.

Way to troll. Socialism is socialism. It doesn't matter if it's health care, space, or war.

Maybe so. But healthcare is much more expensive than war and space.

Not necessarily.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: winnar111
Makes sense. Now that the government is a health care factory, there's no money for Neil Armstrong moments.

Way to troll. Socialism is socialism. It doesn't matter if it's health care, space, or war.

Maybe so. But healthcare is much more expensive than war and space.

Not necessarily.

It is in the 21st century United States.

 

[da loser]

why does it take an obtuse mission to develop things needed on the earth?

why can't you just work towards researching useful things from the get go?

 

[Freshgeardude]

Originally posted by: alien42

Originally posted by: freshgeardude
Yet another thing Obama is planning to do that no one likes. good job voting for him. He IS ruining the American dream. and this is another one, because when I finish high school and college, I want to become an astronaut, and he wants to take away my dream!

is my sarcasm meter broken? Obama has been very vocal about his support of space exploration even when it is not favorable with the general population. the space shuttle program is near its end and we have no immediate replacement. NASA has struggled under the GWB administration and it is a shame.

no sarcasm, he obviously wants to take away funding from the space program accoriding to this article, which hurts NASA obviously, which wants to go to the moon and mars, which I want to do in the future of my life, which may get delayed past mine because of him

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: da loser
why does it take an obtuse mission to develop things needed on the earth?

why can't you just work towards researching useful things from the get go?

"Quick, I need a thing to do something! I don't know what the 'thing' is, and I don't know what the 'something' is, but I need it soon!"

A lot of our technology comes because of completely unrelated work, as well as from fields which were once deemed frivolous or useless.

Particle physics - psh, who cares about subatomic particles? It was once a waste of time for morons to be bothering with work on magnets and certain metals. They were wasting their lives tinkering with useless junk.

This is heavily paraphrased (emphasis on the "para" since the wording is nowhere close) from something Carl Sagan said: Would you, back before the discovery of the electron, have said to someone, "I need you to find a thing that will let me create light in my own home, and run various devices, such as something to wash clothing, and keep food cold."

Would your first thought have been to start looking for an object with a mass of a tiny tiny fraction of a gram? Would you have ever come up with the idea to use coils of wire with magnets in order to make these tiny particles move?


"Obtuse" research can lead to amazingly revolutionary discoveries.

 

[alien42]

Originally posted by: freshgeardude

Originally posted by: alien42

Originally posted by: freshgeardude
Yet another thing Obama is planning to do that no one likes. good job voting for him. He IS ruining the American dream. and this is another one, because when I finish high school and college, I want to become an astronaut, and he wants to take away my dream!

is my sarcasm meter broken? Obama has been very vocal about his support of space exploration even when it is not favorable with the general population. the space shuttle program is near its end and we have no immediate replacement. NASA has struggled under the GWB administration and it is a shame.

no sarcasm, he obviously wants to take away funding from the space program accoriding to this article, which hurts NASA obviously, which wants to go to the moon and mars, which I want to do in the future of my life, which may get delayed past mine because of him

the article is specifically about going back to the moon and no other aspect or program of NASA. might as well call an apple an orange.

 

[tvarad]

Originally posted by: crisscross
....

I live in India and we recently sent a mission to the moon and hey India has a LOT more things to fix when compared to the US and there was a lot of criticism about how the money could have been better spent in alleviating poverty but the truth is the space program is also driving a lot of kids to school. The city where the satellite launch center is located has kids with not enough money to eat now dreaming about studying and become scientists and has given them a purpose in life.

The Indian space program is a boondoggle equivalent in proportion to the post-Apollo NASA space endeavors. The bureaucracy that's been built around makes NASA look like a nimble ballerina. And what's driving Indian school-kids to school are people like Narayan Murthy (CEO of Infosys who made his chauffeur a millionaire through Infosys stock), Sunil Mittal (who was able to put a phone into the hands of the local vegetable vendor when the Indian Government couldn't do it even after four decades of controlling the telecommunications industry) and the like. ISRO is a big jobs and social engineering program that's returned peanuts for the amount of resources that's been thrown at it.

I would imagine that the Chinese program is similarly wrapped up in lots of jingoistic rhetoric and very little locally invented engineering. But hey, they have the money and want to flaunt it. I say, let them.