Obama cancels moon missions

[Nick]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8489097.stm

Asshole

[Funkmasterr]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8489097.stm

Asshole

This is one of those rare occasions we agree.

[Winnow]

I already itched about this on the Obama's Fanboi Status is slipping thread. Obama has comepletely failed to impress me with anything.

[Fairweather Pure]

After the economic termoil that the US went through last year, and the lingering after effects that our country will be facing for forseeable future, I begrudgingly agree with the decision. I'm not happy about it, but I understand

[Funkmasterr]

After the economic termoil that the US went through last year, and the lingering after effects that our country will be facing for forseeable future, I begrudgingly agree with the decision. I'm not happy about it, but I understand

On the surface, one might be tempted to agree with you. However, I am willing to bet if you picked apart his 3 bazillion dollar budget he just turned in you could find the money this was going to cost in other less important shit buried in the budget.

[Fairweather Pure]

It always sucks when something you deem important or superior falls under the axe. Privatizing the space program may actually be better in the long run. At the very least, it will allow NASA to review and expand into previously untapped markets and use new resources. Many times, when a company or institution are forced to be frugal, it can be a great benefit. I know the hospital I work at has saved millions in the past year due to the economic downturn and the subsequent requirement to become frugal.

[Noysyrump]

Spending huge sums of cash to do moon missions would fuking fix the economy (or help at the very least). I call bullshit.

[Nick]

They can spend hundreds of billions on weapons they dont need but god forbid we actually be humans who want to explore the universe. No no, much more intelligent to just redirect the funding for that into making guns to make uneducated third world children die.

[Aslanna]

Explore the universe? I could be wrong but haven't we already explored the moon? I am a supporter of space programs but that money could be put into more useful space related exploration that we haven't already done.

[Winnow]

Explore the universe? I could be wrong but haven't we already explored the moon? I am a supporter of space programs but that money could be put into more useful space related exploration that we haven't already done.

That like saying humans explored Africa and Antarctica and state that we've already explored the Earth.

Need to establish moon base!


My childhood dreams have already been crushed. I grew up seeing Apollo Astronauts land on the moon and we've been going backwards ever since. I cried the day the Challenger blew up on Jan 28, 1986 because I knew what a huge setback it would be for our space program. Little did I know it would be worse that I imagined.


Fuck Obama. I don't care if half our nation and all of Africa dies of starvation. I want to see mankind land on the moon again and Mars before I die. Ultimately, we're just going to rot in the ground (or in space). I want to see some cool stuff before I die.



Lets roll!

In all seriousness. As with the Apollo program in the 60's, sometimes the country can get behind an extremely ambitious program. It reinvigorates the workforce and also provides tons of spinoff technology. Fuck Obama. Give the fucking project 3 Billion of the 3,800 billion 2011 budget. What an asswipe. I hate this guy. Worse than Bush.

[Aabidano]

Going back to the moon was a politically motivated idea, and not a bad one. National pride, etc...

NASA didn't really want to go back to the moon since there's no real reason to to back unless significant resources were found to exist there. The money can be better spent elsewhere, still by NASA. Sending someone to the moon while really cool and quite an accomplishment isn't so useful as it's basically a dead end of itself. The technology developed along the way would still be useful, but the chances of creating "something new" are reduced when you're performing the same task a second time.

Congress has gotten caught in the same trap US businesses are in. Neglecting research since they want to know exactly how they'll profit next month, quarter or year, and if you can't give them a guaranteed profit they aren't going to cough up the money. Doing the same thing over and over is a more sure fire plan despite diminishing returns. Almost seems like the decisions are being made by MBAs.

[Bojangels]

The president's budget request plans an investment of an additional $6bn in Nasa over the next five years - an overall $100bn commitment to the agency (its budget for 2011 would be $19bn).

We put a guy on the moon 40 years ago. Doing it again has nothing to do with exploration. I'm sure we can do better.

Unmanned expeditions are the way to go for exploring the galaxy imo. I'm glad to see NASA shifting their sights.

[miir]

Sending people to the moon was cool in the 60s.

[Aslanna]

Explore the universe? I could be wrong but haven't we already explored the moon? I am a supporter of space programs but that money could be put into more useful space related exploration that we haven't already done.

That like saying humans explored Africa and Antarctica and state that we've already explored the Earth.

It doesn't cost billions of dollars a year to explore Africa. So no.. It's nothing like that.

My childhood dreams have already been crushed. I grew up seeing Apollo Astronauts land on the moon and we've been going backwards ever since. I cried the day the Challenger blew up on Jan 28, 1986 because I knew what a huge setback it would be for our space program. Little did I know it would be worse that I imagined.

Life is disappointment. I'm sure that's all Obama's fault as well.

"This isn't a step backwards. I think the step backwards was trying to recreate the Moon landings of 40 years ago using largely yesterday's technology, instead of game-changing new technology that can take us further, faster and more affordably into space."

[Aabidano]

The consensus is that the space shuttles have actually hurt us, as they've lasted so long and cost so much. But not quite enough of a cost to kill them off.

On that line of thought, the ISS should be allowed to drop into the sea and the funds allocated to it spent elsewhere.

[Siji]

I understand the decision even though I'm not a fan of it.

Going to the moon would serve many purposes right now. What would at first seem the most trivial would be the 'cool' factor. Personally I think we need that right now. What attention does NASA get? What interest does space exploration have right now? Very low. Most people don't pay attention to shuttle missions, they don't much care about the space station and they could give a shit about finding water on Mars. Do a moon mission, in high def video, put people walking on another planet and generate that buzz again. Have an astronaut update their facebook and twitter accounts from the moon. ("omghi im on moon 2day!!1!!") Maybe there'll be less resistance from the public to pumping money back into Space.

Another thing is the technology and knowledge base. We went to the moon (supposedly!) on calculator intelligence. I'd wager that nearly everyone that was critical to the moon missions is long retired or dead. The people in place now don't have the experience, they've never done it. And you want to just try for Mars? That's like saying My dad got a speeding ticket so I should be able to handle Harvard law no problem.

Making NASA private is fine with me too. I don't care if the booster rockets all of the McDonalds logo on them, or even better a Viagra logo (how fitting). Maybe then there would be less issue when shit blows up. Because it happens, get over it. Space is risky, people doing it know it ahead of time. Mourn and move on. More people die walking to work than space exploration.

We need to get back up and out there. We've fucked this place up enough. And like Smith says, we're a virus with a need to spread.

[*~*stragi*~*]

They can spend hundreds of billions on weapons they dont need but god forbid we actually be humans who want to explore the universe. No no, much more intelligent to just redirect the funding for that into making guns to make uneducated third world children die.

Scottland is more than welcome to land a man on the moon with it's own resources and your tax money that you probably don't pay. It's not your money and it's not your accomplishment, it's America's. AMERICA, FUCK YEAH. GUNS

[*~*stragi*~*]

Sending people to the moon was cool in the 60s.

yeah call me when we have a mars base

edit: a mars base to launch nuclear weapons from

[*~*stragi*~*]

oh hey what do you know we are going to spend our money on things that aren't stupid like landing on the moon

article from people who don't hate the usa:

http://gizmodo.com/5461719/its-time-to- ... zing-space

Looked at another way: The budget junks a backward-looking program and funds a brand-new one that will focus on developing new space technologies, exploring the solar system with robots, and pushing humans closer to living offworld.

What The Budget Really Says: Robotic Exploration, New Engines, and Geoscience

If you're excited about going to space, you shouldn't be disappointed about the Constellation Program. Many have mistaken today's budget news to mean that the US is retreating from space, or that we can no longer afford a space program. In fact, that is untrue. Obama has proposed a budget increase to NASA of $6 billion over five years.

Under the new budget, we'd see a revamped NASA program focused on scientific innovation, rather than recreating old experiments.

probably only spending 6 billion over 5 years to fund ways to figure out how to indirectly kill third world babies with guns FROM SPACE

[Aabidano]

Space Haggis for the win.

[Fairweather Pure]

As with the Apollo program in the 60's, sometimes the country can get behind an extremely ambitious program. It reinvigorates the workforce and also provides tons of spinoff technology.

The current generation of Americans just don't give a fuck about going to the moon. It's an old hat and will never be exciting. You're stuck on the moon while this generation wants Mars, or stfu. Either way, I see no reason why an actual human should be part of the process. Only after years and years of robotic research should we even consider sending humans to another celestial body.

I was hoping alternate energy would've been what America united around and would go on to became a world leader and innovator, but that dosen't look likely. The trickle down technology from such an endevor would have a far more impact on the economy and day to day living than anything space related could ever hope to acheive.

[Funkmasterr]

As with the Apollo program in the 60's, sometimes the country can get behind an extremely ambitious program. It reinvigorates the workforce and also provides tons of spinoff technology.

The current generation of Americans just don't give a fuck about going to the moon. It's an old hat and will never be exciting. You're stuck on the moon while this generation wants Mars, or stfu. Either way, I see no reason why an actual human should be part of the process. Only after years and years of robotic research should we even consider sending humans to another celestial body.

I was hoping alternate energy would've been what America united around and would go on to became a world leader and innovator, but that dosen't look likely. The trickle down technology from such an endevor would have a far more impact on the economy and day to day living than anything space related could ever hope to acheive.

Here is the bottom line. Going to the moon, just because we have done it before, will help further space technology. Space technology at some point down the road, maybe 5 years or maybe 50,000 is going to save humans from extinction by allowing us to leave this planet.

That is more important than the economy, it's more important than global warming, it's more important than anything else unless of course our continued existence isn't a concern. And just because the payoff for this could potentially be so far down the road doesn't mean it's ok to continue to hack funding and put shit off - this technology takes a long time to develop, even when funded properly (which it pretty much never has been) - so we need to figure the shit out now.

The problem being, most people are so concerned with their current level of comfort, and/or don't care about anything they won't be around to feel the effect of, so space research to them is a waste of money.

[Winnow]

Most of you weren't even born when we landed on the moon. You didn't even experience the excitement first hand yet you say it's old hat?

The current generation sucks balls.

[Sylvus]

Here is the bottom line. Going to the moon, just because we have done it before, will help further space technology. Space technology at some point down the road, maybe 5 years or maybe 50,000 is going to save humans from extinction by allowing us to leave this planet.

That is more important than the economy, it's more important than global warming, it's more important than anything else unless of course our continued existence isn't a concern. And just because the payoff for this could potentially be so far down the road doesn't mean it's ok to continue to hack funding and put shit off - this technology takes a long time to develop, even when funded properly (which it pretty much never has been) - so we need to figure the shit out now.

The problem being, most people are so concerned with their current level of comfort, and/or don't care about anything they won't be around to feel the effect of, so space research to them is a waste of money.

Please read the links presented in this thread before you make yourself look like a total Irishman moron. (inc xenophobia comment!)

Here are some relevant quotey bits...

Regarding why he's scrapping the Constellation program

But in his 2011 budget request issued on Monday, Mr Obama said the project was too costly, "behind schedule, and lacking in innovation".

...

"While we're cancelling Constellation, we're not cancelling our ambitions," said Jim Kohlenberger, chief of staff at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP).
"This isn't a step backwards. I think the step backwards was trying to recreate the Moon landings of 40 years ago using largely yesterday's technology, instead of game-changing new technology that can take us further, faster and more affordably into space."

Regarding what Obama's plan is going to fund

[One program] funded at $7.8 billion over five years, will invent and demonstrate large-scale, new and novel approaches to spaceflight such as in-orbit fuel depots and rendezvous and docking technologies, and closed-loop life support systems so that our future robotic and human exploration missions are both highly capable and more affordable . . . [Another program] provides $3 billion over five years for robotic exploration precursor missions that will pave the way for later human exploration of the moon, Mars and nearby asteroids.

If this budget passes Congress, it would be a major step toward a common-sense approach to space colonization that involves robots and brand-new approaches to human spaceflight.

The new budget also earmarks over $3 billion for what Bolden calls "new engines, propellants, materials and combustion processes, ultimately leading to innovative ways of accessing space to go beyond low Earth orbit." An additional $4.9 billion goes to generalized space technology research, and $2 billion goes to satellites that will help observe climate change and other Earth processes. This is a boon to geoscience, and will give us more data than ever on how to predict what will happen as our climate transforms.

Again, notice that a lot of this money is going into innovation and funding for the basic sciences that will spawn crazy new technologies for everything from space habitats to terraforming. The idea is to pump money into research so that the next time humans explore space we'll know a hell of a lot more about it and can establish viable communities in orbit, on the Moon, or on other planets.

Here is what BUZZ MOTHERFUCKING ALDRIN thinks

I also believe the steps we will be taking following the President's direction will best position NASA and other space agencies to send humans to Mars and other exciting destinations as quickly as possible. To do that, we will need to support many types of game-changing technologies NASA and its partners will be developing. Mars is the next frontier for humankind, and NASA will be leading the way there if we aggressively support the President's plans.

You should have realized when you were agreeing with Nick that you must not have had your facts straight. I realize that you don't like Obama, but you and he have the exact same goals for the space program. He's scrapping (what he feels is) a bad project to make room for (what he feels are) good projects. He's not shoestringing the space program, far from it.

[Funkmasterr]

I'm sorry, but I have absolutely zero confidence that Obama or anyone in our government outside of NASA is qualified or has any business saying what is or isn't important for us to do as a next step.

While the rocket technology we were planning to use to get to the moon was old, the technology we could use while their to assess things and learn about the universe around us is not. If you, or Obama, thinks any amount of money thrown at the space program is going to yield any form of considerable progress that would rival going to the moon again in a even somewhat comparable time frame, you're delusional.

While I do clearly believe that we need to further our technology, I don't feel that current plans should be scrapped in order to do so. As far as I'm concerned the space program should be a large chunk of our nations budget every year for the rest of our existence.

Also, I want the government to stay away from colonization of space on any scale larger than housing our astronauts. I say this for two reasons;
1- The private sector is much more fit to fund and carry this task out
2- I can already forsee the United States government thinking they have the right to govern people in space, outside of the bounds of this country, which they most certainly do not have the right to do.

[*~*stragi*~*]

space belongs to AMERICA

[Winnow]

2- I can already forsee the United States government thinking they have the right to govern people in space, outside of the bounds of this country, which they most certainly do not have the right to do.

China will rule space. Obama is turning us into has beens.

These space mission cuts will cost us our scientists

After yesterday's retreat, the US and Europe will fall behind in the space race. The next man on the moon will be Chinese


Few people who ­remember the 1960s can fail to have been inspired by the drama and excitement of the space missions, which pitted the United States against the Soviet Union in a race to land a man on the moon. Today there is still a massively competitive space race; but yesterday the Barack Obama administration cancelled its Constellation programme, which had aimed to put astronauts back on the moon. With the US effectively out of the race to the moon, the field is now clear for India, China and Japan.

The 1960s space race was about ­military prowess. This time it's about economic and technical leadership, but in terms of our future prosperity it is just as significant.

The US says it no longer wants to spend big money on rockets and will let private industry build them. Nasa also plans to develop ways of refuelling spacecraft in space to cut the costs of taking them there. This might be the best way eventually to get humans to Mars. There will be robotic missions to explore where humans want to go. I hope this means that at last we will get a sample of Mars and the missions won't be an expensive waste of money.

The main costs of the space programme are salaries – in relative terms the components cost very little. But you can't sack everyone in Nasa, because you know that at some future point you'll need their expertise and experience. I fear that in practice Nasa's leaders will be tempted to have their scientists undertake more background studies. But we've done all the studies we need to obtain samples from Mars and know exactly what to do with them.

Why do we need such samples? For a start, it is not possible to have a manned mission to Mars until we can definitively answer the question of whether there is any life there. Without this ­information, we risk astronauts bringing back microbes to Earth which could wipe out life on our planet. I hope cancelling the moon mission will in fact accelerate humans going to Mars, not mean that something even more ­inspirational will slip back.

Under George W Bush, the US had planned a manned lunar mission by 2015; this was then pushed back to 2018; now it's gone altogether. And Europe isn't any faster when it comes to going to Mars: the European Space Agency wanted to build ExoMars – a robotic mission to Mars – by 2009. But it's already 2010: they've been going for seven years and seem to have little to show for it.

They've gone for a high-cost failsafe mission which is long in the planning; but I believe they should be doing smaller, faster, cheaper projects – those which require a limited number of ­people but can be quickly completed, and through which they can learn a lot, even if the mission "fails" – although I believe there's no such thing as failure if you learn something. I headed the Beagle2 Mars mission in 2003, and in my view it's impossible to ensure a mission has a 99.9% chance of success. It's far better to spend the money on, say, three missions that have 95% chance. Europe could have done Beagle again by 2007, but instead we are still waiting.

By contrast, in India and China things are happening quickly – these countries are not afraid of making mistakes and learning from them. They've both had recent lunar missions; they're now planning to land on the surface with a robot; and after that will come a manned mission. I believe that the next man or woman on the moon will be Chinese.

And the importance of this goes way beyond space travel, once a nation shows it has the ambition, the ingenuity and the economic strength to mount such a mission. Just as the launch of Sputnik in 1957 showed that the Soviets were a technological power to be reckoned with, so it will be with India or China. These countries recognise that dynamic economies need to create something for the nation to export – be it providing the innovation for electronic goods, or whatever. Lunar missions – and, beyond that, Mars missions – are hugely effective in bringing young ­people into science and technology.

In the west, we have now had two generations who have missed out on such inspiration. Indeed, we risk our top scientists migrating to Asia.

If you went into a British classroom and asked how many children wanted to be a scientist, on average 2% would put their hands up. In India, about 30% would say yes. That's the difference between the west and the emerging economies; and that's why, ultimately, if we don't address this situation, it could be us staffing their call centres.

The race is on to see if Obama can completely destroy the United States before we can boot him out of office in 2012.

[Sylvus]

I'm sorry, but I have absolutely zero confidence that Obama or anyone in our government outside of NASA is qualified or has any business saying what is or isn't important for us to do as a next step.

So then why do you seem to have confidence in what was Bush's plan? And did you not read the NASA Administrator quote, or the quote from former astronaut Buzz Aldrin? The main people who are railing against this are Republican Congressmen from states who are actively working on the Constellation program, and, like that Gizmodo article points out, isn't there something a little fishy about Republicans not supporting the privatization of anything?

Sorry, guy, but it seems like you're just against the plan because it's Obama's, even though it's basically doing exactly what you say you want. You even mention privatization in your response, which is exactly what Obama is suggesting. Which is it?

Personally, I support the most efficient use of our resources, which it sounds like Constellation wasn't doing.

[Winnow]

Not that any Obama worshipper cares about anything but stem cell research but maybe you should open your eyes a bit:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 15862.html

China's Scary Space Ambitions

The U.S. risks losing the air superiority in Asia purchased through great sacrifice.

China's Jan. 11 test of exoatmospheric missile interception is worth paying attention to—especially in Washington. It isn't just an early step toward development of a missile-defense system; it's also a signal of a radical change in the country's stance on the militarization of space. The United States should take this as a wake-up call that in the long term, China intends to challenge its strategic superiority in aerospace...

These are all articles form this year.

http://www.universetoday.com/2010/01/20 ... 0-or-2011/

China is planning to launch their own space station, named Tiangong, by the end of 2010 or beginning of 2011. There have been a few instances where information about the station surfaces briefly over the past few years about the development of the space station. Specific details on the program are not being release in large doses by the Chinese National Space Administration (CNSA), so the development of the station is somewhat shrouded in mystery...

Further down the road, China plans to build a larger, more long-term space facility. Zhang Jianqi, Deputy Commander-in-Chief of China's Manned Space Engineering Program, told the Xinhua News Agency last March, "…We will go all out to build a long-term manned space station by 2020." This fits in well with China's plans to take humans to the Moon after 2020, as it could provide a support platform for such a venture.

China will have a real base of operations within the next decade while we fuck around with the crippled ISS. Obama is royally fucking us with his lack of leadership in the space sector.

[Aslanna]

Further down the road, China plans to build a larger, more long-term space facility. Zhang Jianqi, Deputy Commander-in-Chief of China's Manned Space Engineering Program, told the Xinhua News Agency last March,"…We will go all out to build a long-term manned space station by 2020." This fits in well with China's plans to take humans to the Moon after 2020, as it could provide a support platform for such a venture.

Well there you go.. Your dream will be fulfilled. There will be "mankind land(ing) on the moon again" more than likely before you die. Oh wait... It doesn't count because it's not Americans. Got it!

[Nick]

Don't worry Sylvus! You're far too much of an important and intelligent man on VV to dare question! We could never do that, we're all too busy grovelling for your validation.

PLEASE LOVE ME SYLVUS. YOU'RE IMPORTANT.

[Fairweather Pure]

Don't worry Sylvus! You're far too much of an important and intelligent man on VV to dare question! We could never do that, we're all too busy grovelling for your validation.

PLEASE LOVE ME SYLVUS. YOU'RE IMPORTANT.

Sooooo no resonable, well thought out counter argument. Gotcha. You've really devolved into a DURR DURR DURR type of poster lately.

[Nick]

Cool, thanks for the advice, I'll be sure to sit on the fence and take abuse without question from now on.

Oh wait, that would be fucking retarded.

[Xyun]

I have bad news for you winnow, you're gonna have to deal with this until 2016.

[Funkmasterr]

Further down the road, China plans to build a larger, more long-term space facility. Zhang Jianqi, Deputy Commander-in-Chief of China's Manned Space Engineering Program, told the Xinhua News Agency last March,"…We will go all out to build a long-term manned space station by 2020." This fits in well with China's plans to take humans to the Moon after 2020, as it could provide a support platform for such a venture.

Well there you go.. Your dream will be fulfilled. There will be "mankind land(ing) on the moon again" more than likely before you die. Oh wait... It doesn't count because it's not Americans. Got it!

Come on.. Of course it is more exciting when it is YOUR country there, whether you are American, Chinese, Japanese, Nigerian, Russian...... Unless of course you just want to be argumentative.

[Funkmasterr]

I'm sorry, but I have absolutely zero confidence that Obama or anyone in our government outside of NASA is qualified or has any business saying what is or isn't important for us to do as a next step.

So then why do you seem to have confidence in what was Bush's plan? And did you not read the NASA Administrator quote, or the quote from former astronaut Buzz Aldrin? The main people who are railing against this are Republican Congressmen from states who are actively working on the Constellation program, and, like that Gizmodo article points out, isn't there something a little fishy about Republicans not supporting the privatization of anything?

Sorry, guy, but it seems like you're just against the plan because it's Obama's, even though it's basically doing exactly what you say you want. You even mention privatization in your response, which is exactly what Obama is suggesting. Which is it?

Personally, I support the most efficient use of our resources, which it sounds like Constellation wasn't doing.

It has nothing to do with Bush and to be honest it wasn't really his plan beyond "let's go to the moon" (which probably wasn't really "his" plan either).

Yes I am for the privatization of parts of the space "industry", like I clearly mentioned above, however I think NASA still has a role to fill. Also, until the private sector really gets into the swing of things NASA still has responsibility.

I see what is going on as something like this; Because we have conceded that there is more energy and environment efficient technological possibilities for automobiles that will be able to drive faster and more smoothly, we stop manufacturing cars for a unknown number of years until said technology is ready.

You really don't have to be a astronaut to understand why it would be beneficial and important for us to go to the moon NOW, and not say fuck it, lets aim for mars in 20 (and I think that is aiming high, if we count solely on the government to get us there.)

[Kilmoll the Sexy]

I have bad news for you winnow, you're gonna have to deal with this until 2016.

At the rate he has lost support, he will be in negative numbers by the time 2012 rolls around.

[*~*stragi*~*]

2- I can already forsee the United States government thinking they have the right to govern people in space, outside of the bounds of this country, which they most certainly do not have the right to do.

China will rule space. Obama is turning us into has beens.

china can't make quality goods so any kind of vehicle they put into space will implode immediately. not worried.

[Jice Virago]

Bush made a politically motivated promise that was known to be unfeasable and impractical at the time, because everyone was freaking over the Columbia fuckup. There is no reason to send anything to the moon other than dick waving at this point. Getting to Mars and more unmanned data gathering on nearby objects is a much more prudent use of our time. The ISS is also a longterm investment, because we will eventually need some kind of semi-permanent infastructure up there to advance our exploration and colonization efforts.

Going to the moon is pointless and wastes resources better spent on domestic issues.

[Kilmoll the Sexy]

How exactly is Mars better than moon? Unless they are developing some type of warp drive, then neither of them is realistically better than the other. Nothing inside our own solar system is worth exploring as options for resources. If they were working towards something that would allow travel in the area of light-speed, then I would give a shit.

Right now, all the advances we are going to get from short term space travel that will impact life here are pretty well exhausted. We already have adult diapers and Tang, so lets start looking at different modes of travel rather than some fucked up moon camp.

[Siji]

2- I can already forsee the United States government thinking they have the right to govern people in space, outside of the bounds of this country, which they most certainly do not have the right to do.

China will rule space. Obama is turning us into has beens.

china can't make quality goods so any kind of vehicle they put into space will implode immediately. not worried.

This made me laugh out loud in it's level of truth.

Seriously though.. why is it always "us vs them"? If China makes it to the moon, good for them. They should be proud and everyone should congratulate them. Idealistically, I'd like to see multiple countries working together to accomplish stuff like this as it benefits us all.

[Winnow]

I would so turn you all in as communist sympathizers!

To Jice: the ISS is a piece of shit junk pile in space. It's a stepping stone to nothing. It should be deorbited into the ocean to save money.

I'm all for unmanned exploration of the solar system. NASA's budget should be ten times what it is. We should be cranking out Mars rovers and other probes, and making ten copies at a time as it's the initial research/design and first copy that costs the most, need to make backups in case of failure. Mars probes should be launched on a yearly basis, with improvements to the probe's functions also coming yearly.

Fuck all this aid to Africa and other overpopulated countries/continents. They're a bunch of dumbasses that can't control their own population. They need to die off, not keep being fed to make the problem worse. All of these huge charitable donations by the American people should be going to NASA, not the fucking Red Cross. "Here little Motombo! Here's a nice United Nations Biscutt to keep you alive so you can fuck some more to add to the overpopulation you dumbass" I can't stand "do gooders" who are trying to make themselves feel better by doing this shit, covering up for some other inadequacy in their lives.

[Kilmoll the Sexy]

I do tend to agree to a point with you on the foreign aid....but why throw that money at moon exploration? Unless you are going to colonize it with all the lazy, criminal, useless thugs....in which case you have me on board again.

[Canelek]

Didn't we learn anything from Airplane II: The Sequel?

Buffalo Anchorman: Our top story Tonight, Four-alarm fire rages through Downtown Buffalo. Also in the news, Lunar Shuttle heads for the Sun, and certain disaster.
Tokyo Anchorman: Our top story Tonight, Four-alarm fire rages through Downtown Tokyo. Also in the news, American Lunar Mission locked in death struggle.
Moscow Anchorman: [with a gun pointed to his head] A Four-alarm fire in Downtown Moscow clears way for a glorious new tractor factory. And on the lighter side of the news, Hundreds of Capitalists are soon to perish in Shuttle disaster.

[*~*stragi*~*]

How exactly is Mars better than moon? Unless they are developing some type of warp drive, then neither of them is realistically better than the other. Nothing inside our own solar system is worth exploring as options for resources. If they were working towards something that would allow travel in the area of light-speed, then I would give a shit.

Right now, all the advances we are going to get from short term space travel that will impact life here are pretty well exhausted. We already have adult diapers and Tang, so lets start looking at different modes of travel rather than some fucked up moon camp.

mars has an atomosphere
i wouldn't want to be on the moon during a meteorite shower with millions of rocks crashing into it at 20k mph.

[Drolgin Steingrinder]

How exactly is Mars better than moon? Unless they are developing some type of warp drive, then neither of them is realistically better than the other. Nothing inside our own solar system is worth exploring as options for resources. If they were working towards something that would allow travel in the area of light-speed, then I would give a shit.

Right now, all the advances we are going to get from short term space travel that will impact life here are pretty well exhausted. We already have adult diapers and Tang, so lets start looking at different modes of travel rather than some fucked up moon camp.

Why Mars? Because it's what's next. Someone said it much better than I ever could:

'Cause we came out of the cave, and we looked over the hill and we saw fire; and we crossed the ocean and we pioneered the west, and we took to the sky. The history of man is hung on a timeline of exploration and this is what's next.

Amazing things happen when you set advanced goals. When JFK announced that the US would put a man on the moon by the end of the decade, most of the tech needed wasn't even in its infancy, it hadn't even been conceived yet. The alloys needed, the communications, the logistics of the return weren't more than theorized about.

But it happened. Because goals were set that were on the very edge of the possible.

Doing the same thing again (which I know is not what you're advocating, Kilmoll) but cheaper, or faster, or in different colored jumpsuits and with cooler graphics to explain the landing mechanism to the tv viewers just isn't going to cut it.

Another thing is the technology and knowledge base. We went to the moon (supposedly!) on calculator intelligence. I'd wager that nearly everyone that was critical to the moon missions is long retired or dead. The people in place now don't have the experience, they've never done it. And you want to just try for Mars? That's like saying My dad got a speeding ticket so I should be able to handle Harvard law no problem.

That's one of the most fallacious analogies I've ever encountered on this board. It's more like saying that your dad built and drove a racing car as fast as was possible back then, left you all his notes, video diaries, documents detailing the tech involved and you spent the next 40 years getting better and learning, and now you're trying to build a car that'll go faster and further.

Just try for Mars? What were the moon landings if not an organization, a country, "just trying" ? The most concerted, well-funded, publically supported, politically encouraged project could be described as "just trying" when there's uncertainty involved - as there will be the first time anything of this magnitude is attempted. Hell, Michael Collins was quoted as saying that the odds of the return flight being successful were just this side of even. I know it's trite, I know it sounds like the biggest fucking cliche, but it's true:

Unless you try, you won't succeed.

[Winnow]

We had a plan way back in the 70's to go to Mars. Besides there being no control over the Challenger disaster, I've sat and watched my country do jack shit and actually go backwards in manned exploration. Remember Skylab in the 70's? That was better than this fucked up ISS station.

Wernher von fucking Braun proposed a Mars mission back in 1947. He continued to propose Mars missions through the 50's and 60's.

Following the success of the Apollo Program, von Braun advocated a manned mission to Mars as a focus for NASAs manned space program.[14] Von Braun's proposal used Saturn V boosters to launch nuclear-powered (NERVA) upper stages that would power two six-crew spacecraft on a dual mission in the early 1980s. The proposal was considered by (then president) Richard Nixon but passed over in favor of the Space Shuttle.

since then the timeline for a landing on Mars has been moved back from 2010 (hey, here we are with jack shit to show for it the past 30 years) to pretty much never in our lifetime.

According to New Scientist, an argon plasma-based VASIMR rocket could reduce the transit time to less than 40 days.

Well there you go! Make it fucking happen. Fat chance.

There is no direction or motivation and Obama is sapping the life out of manned missions once again, kicking a very beaten dog even more. For 30+ years I've seen the United States waste time, pretty much passing over my generation. Manned missions to other terrestrial worlds is in fact going to skip a generation. We are already 35+ years past landing on the moon. The engineers behind those missions are dying off, in their 60's 70's and 80's. It's incredibly sad that the current generation lazy fucks don't understand the massive undertaking the Moon Mission took. I admit that I was very young when they happened, but the WORLD oozed with pride over the accomplishment. There is zero desire on the part of the game console generation to do anything inspired. There is no focused government to get the job done, only Obama trying to get himself elected for another term. He's no John Kennedy that's for sure. Fuck him.

In my opinion, we will never be a society capable of the kind of focused determination that took place during the 1960's in order to get a Man on the Moon. The thrill of discovery is gone. Humanity is on the decline. Glad I was alive to see it's pinnacle.

[Drolgin Steingrinder]

blahblahblahobamablahblahobamablahblahblah

It's sad. You're not even trying anymore.

[Winnow]

blahblahblahobamablahblahobamablahblahblah

It's sad. You're not even trying anymore.

As opposed to your pep talk about "unless you try you won't succeed"? Please. Read some more self help books. There's got to be more inspirational quotes out there than that these days. The point is our (my) government will never again be in a position to inspire greatness on the scale required for a manned mission to another terrestrial planet or satellite. You can talk about it all you want but it's not going to happen with Obama in office. Although...I bet you see something happen with the BCS College Bowl system! He's really getting geared up for that challenge! Moon be damned, he'll get more votes forcing a College Football playoff system.

edit: been home sick with flu past three days. makes it difficult to write inspired stuff.

[Kaldaur]

Winnow, I want to start by saying that I share your desire to see space placed upon a much-needed pedestal in our society. Space represents our future and infinite possibilities; the idea that out there can exist worlds for people to find, settle, explore, chart: that's a heady proposition. Perhaps settlement of livable planetoids is still centuries away. Baby steps are what is needed.

I have a friend who is an engineer and mathematician who graduated from Yale. He is working for a private company, along with dozens of other engineers, to create new methods of sub-orbital and orbital spacecraft. That company is very limited in its scope, based mainly around the idea of quick trip tourism. However, this is one company working towards one specific goal. There are other groups currently keeping the space dream alive in many different ways. You say that we have wasted thirty years of process, and I would agree that since the early 70s NASA has basically twiddled its thumbs in regards to possible manned exploration. In fact, I feel sort of odd arguing against a government agency while you advocate its continued importance. I think the future of space flight will be driven by its business potential, like most other industries that exist around the world. Unless another Cold War springs up, which I could see coming about over the next ten to fifteen years, there's no impetus for America to stand firm as the leaders of space flight. The days of NASA are faded, and it's hard to say whether or not that's a bad thing. They put a man on the moon. They also used the same ride for thirty five years because it was cheaper to replace the tail light every other year rather than buy a newer, more efficient model. If you were driving a Gremlin to this day, I would seriously question your sanity as an individual. Unless you're into dying in a steel-framed crash of epic proportions.

NASA could be strong again. But what would it take? Furthermore, what have any administrations since JFK done to fervently push the need for an up-to-date and sleek space program? One could even argue that without the Cold War or JFK getting riddled with bullets, there wouldn't be a flag on the moon. With so many government programs, tax breaks, and little to no income, what senator or representative do you expect to commit political suicide by calling for increased space dollars while their constituents lose jobs and homes? It's easy for us to say that NASA should have a budget of fifteen trillionible dollars, but another for districts to accept the hit. Will you take it out of defense? Good luck getting the mili-indo complex to budge. Education? We don't have any money for education as it is. Hell, the last two large education initiatives have been unfunded, and districts are wallowing in debt and layoffs. There's no simple method for government to bring the space program up to a respectable level of expenditure.

For what its worth, I happen to think that space is the most important thing we could spend our money on. Like making SS financially solvent, space is an investment in the future. I just don't see the government stepping up to the plate, unless it becomes a national security issue. It's the 21st century. We have to look to other areas and individuals for our space powers.