Sigh, I am really starting to hate Obama now

[tvarad]

Originally posted by: freshgeardude
have a look at this, im sure there are hundreds of more things

Text

ALL from funding NASA. ALL.

how about Velcro? came from NASA.

just look at how many things in our daily life we have because of nasa and funding to nasa, imagine how much we can discover on the moon and beyond.

Sigh, this argument is getting a little worn. Remember that most of these inventions were by-products of necessity for NASA when it had goal oriented programs like Apollo. It's totally lost it's way since, especially with the shuttle program. I don't think spending a billion dollars per space shuttle launch just to invent the next Velcro by accident (and lose two crews in the process) was a good return on investment.

And NASA invented all these things when the private sector did not have the massive resources to work on such technologies. Now we have companies that dwarf NASA in budgeting, let alone funds for original breakthrough research.

The Areas/Constellation program is fundamentally flawed because the resources just aren't there to make EOR work effectively. Assuming that NASA develops the program up to that moment and realizes it's mistake, it'll basically say "if we shut the program now, think of the money that's been poured into the thing. Give us money over and above the budgeting and the cost over-runs to make the thing work". The Obama people have figured this out.

The fundamental problem for NASA is that it's become very brahminical in it's outlook i.e. it's hoarding space knowledge for it's own benefit rather than for the benefit of the country. Griffin's anointing himself as space technologies knowledge GOD is a classic example of that. The guy so needs to be fired (and I think that'll probably be one of the first acts of the Obama administration).

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: Genx87
Hehe well we are in a recession on the verge of a depression. Cuts are expected. However I will enjoy watching people who blasted Bush for not supporting NASA as much as he could praise Obama for this move.

exactly. I recall a couple of Bush hates NASA threads.

 

[IronWing]

Originally posted by: freshgeardude

Originally posted by: ironwing
OP: I think you might be under the impression that NASA is an agency primarily concerned with science and engineering. It isn't. NASA's function is to transfer billions of tax dollars per year to politically connected contractors. What we get in return is largely irrelevant in the equation. Putting on a show for the public once in a while is good marketing but that's about all it it. Ares in/out, Atlas in/out is a political decision based on who greased whom more.

ill quote this again

Text


every time you drink water from the tap, bottles, or anything that is from a civilized place, you can honestly say, hmm this looks safe to drink.

Waste of tax dollars right? keeping you healthy. Nasa invented water filters.

next, every time you use a pair a shoes, you use an invention of NASA, shoe insoles, I wonder how bad your feet will feel without those.

waste of tax dollars right?

want to call a friend or family from a long distance? hmm from coast to coast, from continent to continent? well guess what? NASA

waste of tax dollars right?


how about hand vacuum cleaners and cordless drills? ever need to use those?
Nasa once again...

so you say that Nasa is a waste of tax dollars, yet you use EVERY thing I listed above, and I am SURE there is plenty more

Most tap water is not filtered and the standard treatment methods for tap water haven't changed much in fifty years. NASA may have invented some types of water filters in use today. Was NASA the most cost effective route to developing water filters for terrestrial water systems?

Your assumption seems to be that only NASA could have developed these things and that assumption is wrong.

 

[Vic]

It's only big govt socialism when it's spent on something useful.

If space is so great, why doesn't private industry invest more?

 

[IronWing]

Originally posted by: Vic
It's only big govt socialism when it's spent on something useful.

If space is so great, why doesn't private industry invest more?

Why should they? The govt is handing out big bucks for this stuff. When the govt leaves the arena I suspect the private sector will discover a small market for space services and do it on their own, faster, cheaper, maybe not better or as much. Public money + private profit = waste.

 

[Freshgeardude]

Originally posted by: ironwing

Originally posted by: freshgeardude

Originally posted by: ironwing
OP: I think you might be under the impression that NASA is an agency primarily concerned with science and engineering. It isn't. NASA's function is to transfer billions of tax dollars per year to politically connected contractors. What we get in return is largely irrelevant in the equation. Putting on a show for the public once in a while is good marketing but that's about all it it. Ares in/out, Atlas in/out is a political decision based on who greased whom more.

ill quote this again

Text


every time you drink water from the tap, bottles, or anything that is from a civilized place, you can honestly say, hmm this looks safe to drink.

Waste of tax dollars right? keeping you healthy. Nasa invented water filters.

next, every time you use a pair a shoes, you use an invention of NASA, shoe insoles, I wonder how bad your feet will feel without those.

waste of tax dollars right?

want to call a friend or family from a long distance? hmm from coast to coast, from continent to continent? well guess what? NASA

waste of tax dollars right?


how about hand vacuum cleaners and cordless drills? ever need to use those?
Nasa once again...

so you say that Nasa is a waste of tax dollars, yet you use EVERY thing I listed above, and I am SURE there is plenty more

Most tap water is not filtered and the standard treatment methods for tap water haven't changed much in fifty years. NASA may have invented some types of water filters in use today. Was NASA the most cost effective route to developing water filters for terrestrial water systems?

Your assumption seems to be that only NASA could have developed these things and that assumption is wrong.

is that honestly all you got from that post? lets be real here, OK lets just say I erase where it says tap on the article, the rest is still true, water filters were invented by nasa... period.

 

[L00PY]

Originally posted by: freshgeardude
how about Velcro? came from NASA.

I'm with ProfJohn. This statement is misleading at best, an outright lie at worst. The best you might be able to make the argument that NASA helped popularize the use of Velcro. NASA did not invent water filters either. That article you linked pretty much said as much, stating that water filter technology was around before NASA and they just refined the technology. The converse took place for shoe insoles, with companies refining principles and technologies NASA used elsewhere.

Claiming NASA invented some of these things is about as accurate as saying Toyota invented the car.

 

[brandonbull]

Originally posted by: ironwing
OP: I think you might be under the impression that NASA is an agency primarily concerned with science and engineering. It isn't. NASA's function is to transfer billions of tax dollars per year to politically connected contractors. What we get in return is largely irrelevant in the equation. Putting on a show for the public once in a while is good marketing but that's about all it it. Ares in/out, Atlas in/out is a political decision based on who greased whom more.

At least some one invented something useful for those billions. What have we gotten from the billions transferred to the contractors to support Iraq besides thousands of dead and wounded troops?

 

[Fear No Evil]

Originally posted by: brandonbull

Originally posted by: ironwing
OP: I think you might be under the impression that NASA is an agency primarily concerned with science and engineering. It isn't. NASA's function is to transfer billions of tax dollars per year to politically connected contractors. What we get in return is largely irrelevant in the equation. Putting on a show for the public once in a while is good marketing but that's about all it it. Ares in/out, Atlas in/out is a political decision based on who greased whom more.

At least some one invented something useful for those billions. What have we gotten from the billions transferred to the contractors to support Iraq besides thousands of dead and wounded troops?

This is where I disagree with the 'wasted money' in Iraq argument. SOMEBODY has to make all these bullets, bombs, helicopters, planes, tanks, humvees, body armor suits, etc. And most of the time those companies are in the United States. War isn't always wasted money, it creates a ton of jobs and the war in Iraq I think arguably could be credited with saving TONS of defense jobs. Our troops are getting combat pay, tons of contractors are getting work over there. Companies are selling power and water equipment over there.. etc. Its not just going into a black hole.

 

[frostedflakes]

Kind of disappointing if true, will have to see what he does with NASA once in office. There's so much conflicting info floating around, I have no clue what's going to happen to the Constellation project.

 

[WaTaGuMp]

NASA THANK YOU FOR TEMPURPEDIC MATTRESSES. these kind of things are very important, billions of dollars for better sleep HELL YES.
/end sarcasm

 

[Fear No Evil]

Wasn't one of the arguments like the use against Bush was that he was against science? I guess Obama is trying to one up here there as well.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: freshgeardude

being that I want to be an astro physicist in college(in high school right now) and live in florida, my options can be quite big for NASA, seeing more cuts to NASA is killing me inside

First we had Joe the Plumber and now we have Joe the Astrophysicist (one word, not two). Come back when you graduate, have a family to support, and pay taxes. Getting a tad tired of people pissing and moaning about things that they PLAN on becoming one day. :roll:

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Young Grasshopper
Space exploration = waste of money

That post = waste of space

Seriously, the Space program is FAR more important than we ever thought it was going to be. It's saved more lives and improved conditions in more places than any other endeavor in history...and certainly nobody expected that when it began.

It's also evident to any student of social behavior that eventually we will need to expand off of this planet in order to survive.
Now many people will argue that this will not need to be done for a very long time. Sadly these are the same people that created years as a 2 digit number for computers, thus causing the Millenium bug scare...and the same people who insisted that Hubbard was a fool and that we will have plenty of oil for any foreseeable future.

Edit: BTW, the Space Program is the only government program I can think of that has produced a net profit (and a big one).

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: brandonbull

Originally posted by: ironwing
OP: I think you might be under the impression that NASA is an agency primarily concerned with science and engineering. It isn't. NASA's function is to transfer billions of tax dollars per year to politically connected contractors. What we get in return is largely irrelevant in the equation. Putting on a show for the public once in a while is good marketing but that's about all it it. Ares in/out, Atlas in/out is a political decision based on who greased whom more.

At least some one invented something useful for those billions. What have we gotten from the billions transferred to the contractors to support Iraq besides thousands of dead and wounded troops?

This is where I disagree with the 'wasted money' in Iraq argument.

War isn't always wasted money, it creates a ton of jobs and the war in Iraq I think arguably could be credited with saving TONS of defense jobs. Our troops are getting combat pay, tons of contractors are getting work over there. Companies are selling power and water equipment over there.. etc. Its not just going into a black hole.

Says the guy posting from the comfort and safety of his home.

 

[WaTaGuMp]

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: brandonbull

Originally posted by: ironwing
OP: I think you might be under the impression that NASA is an agency primarily concerned with science and engineering. It isn't. NASA's function is to transfer billions of tax dollars per year to politically connected contractors. What we get in return is largely irrelevant in the equation. Putting on a show for the public once in a while is good marketing but that's about all it it. Ares in/out, Atlas in/out is a political decision based on who greased whom more.

At least some one invented something useful for those billions. What have we gotten from the billions transferred to the contractors to support Iraq besides thousands of dead and wounded troops?

This is where I disagree with the 'wasted money' in Iraq argument.

War isn't always wasted money, it creates a ton of jobs and the war in Iraq I think arguably could be credited with saving TONS of defense jobs. Our troops are getting combat pay, tons of contractors are getting work over there. Companies are selling power and water equipment over there.. etc. Its not just going into a black hole.

Says the guy posting from the comfort and safety of his home.

What if he lives in south central L.A?

 

[Fear No Evil]

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: brandonbull

Originally posted by: ironwing
OP: I think you might be under the impression that NASA is an agency primarily concerned with science and engineering. It isn't. NASA's function is to transfer billions of tax dollars per year to politically connected contractors. What we get in return is largely irrelevant in the equation. Putting on a show for the public once in a while is good marketing but that's about all it it. Ares in/out, Atlas in/out is a political decision based on who greased whom more.

At least some one invented something useful for those billions. What have we gotten from the billions transferred to the contractors to support Iraq besides thousands of dead and wounded troops?

This is where I disagree with the 'wasted money' in Iraq argument.

War isn't always wasted money, it creates a ton of jobs and the war in Iraq I think arguably could be credited with saving TONS of defense jobs. Our troops are getting combat pay, tons of contractors are getting work over there. Companies are selling power and water equipment over there.. etc. Its not just going into a black hole.

Says the guy posting from the comfort and safety of his home.

I'm not sure what my position on the war itself has anything to do with my point. Most people would agree that World War II helped the U.S. get out of the economic trouble it was in.. What does that have to do with the morality of the war? I'm just saying wars cost money, and MAKE money.. Simply saying that war is bad because it costs money is a stupid argument.

 

[fskimospy]

I'm unaware of any "Bush hates NASA" threads, I'd love to see some links to some. That is unless we're talking about the whole "Bush administration ignores global warming science" thing.

 

[sunzt]

NASA Spin Offs

Link shows 2008 issue of Spin Off where it lists most important NASA spin offs from health and medicine, transportation, public safety, Consumer; home; recreation; environmental and agricultural, computer tech, and industrial productivity.

READ IT AND APPRECIATE NASA.

 

[Freshgeardude]

Originally posted by: sunzt
NASA Spin Offs

Link shows 2008 issue of Spin Off where it lists most important NASA spin offs from health and medicine, transportation, public safety, Consumer; home; recreation; environmental and agricultural, computer tech, and industrial productivity.

READ IT AND APPRECIATE NASA.

217 pages of in your face to the people who think NASA is a waste of tax dollars.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

lol nasa sent you over the edge? Not any of his picks for cabinet to insure continuity and that nothing at all changes.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Wasn't one of the arguments like the use against Bush was that he was against science? I guess Obama is trying to one up here there as well.

Scientists would disagree with you.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: brandonbull

Originally posted by: ironwing
OP: I think you might be under the impression that NASA is an agency primarily concerned with science and engineering. It isn't. NASA's function is to transfer billions of tax dollars per year to politically connected contractors. What we get in return is largely irrelevant in the equation. Putting on a show for the public once in a while is good marketing but that's about all it it. Ares in/out, Atlas in/out is a political decision based on who greased whom more.

At least some one invented something useful for those billions. What have we gotten from the billions transferred to the contractors to support Iraq besides thousands of dead and wounded troops?

This is where I disagree with the 'wasted money' in Iraq argument.

War isn't always wasted money, it creates a ton of jobs and the war in Iraq I think arguably could be credited with saving TONS of defense jobs. Our troops are getting combat pay, tons of contractors are getting work over there. Companies are selling power and water equipment over there.. etc. Its not just going into a black hole.

Says the guy posting from the comfort and safety of his home.

I'm not sure what my position on the war itself has anything to do with my point. Most people would agree that World War II helped the U.S. get out of the economic trouble it was in.. What does that have to do with the morality of the war? I'm just saying wars cost money, and MAKE money.. Simply saying that war is bad because it costs money is a stupid argument.

ROI is everything.

 

[LegendKiller]

I am a person for space exploration and science. However, we need a fucking economy to work before we need big rockets. We need roads and bridges, not space shuttles or stations. Pragmatism is important right now, not phallic symbols and ego trips.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: brandonbull

Originally posted by: ironwing
OP: I think you might be under the impression that NASA is an agency primarily concerned with science and engineering. It isn't. NASA's function is to transfer billions of tax dollars per year to politically connected contractors. What we get in return is largely irrelevant in the equation. Putting on a show for the public once in a while is good marketing but that's about all it it. Ares in/out, Atlas in/out is a political decision based on who greased whom more.

At least some one invented something useful for those billions. What have we gotten from the billions transferred to the contractors to support Iraq besides thousands of dead and wounded troops?

This is where I disagree with the 'wasted money' in Iraq argument.

War isn't always wasted money, it creates a ton of jobs and the war in Iraq I think arguably could be credited with saving TONS of defense jobs. Our troops are getting combat pay, tons of contractors are getting work over there. Companies are selling power and water equipment over there.. etc. Its not just going into a black hole.

Says the guy posting from the comfort and safety of his home.

I'm not sure what my position on the war itself has anything to do with my point. Most people would agree that World War II helped the U.S. get out of the economic trouble it was in.. What does that have to do with the morality of the war? I'm just saying wars cost money, and MAKE money.. Simply saying that war is bad because it costs money is a stupid argument.

We can turn that around and look at how much money we net lost from the Vietnam, Korean, Afghanistan, and Iraq conflicts...