Another moon mission

from what i've read it's a mission to prepare for a possible mars mission. sort of a pre-run launch type deal.
but yes, in the space program so far, the costs have outweighed the benefits.

Look forward and have some imagination... the base on the moon will serve as a lunch pad for all space missions... the huge waste of fuel escaping the earths gravity is gone, the fuel can now be used to get to other places quicker, such as mars.

[url=http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2004/01/12012004161524.asp]Bush Space Proposal -- Vision Or Political Maneuver?[/url]
unfortunately it appears to be nothing more than a political maneuver.

Every move that man makes, no matter how small or apparantly insignificant, is part of his maneuver.

I wish for NASA to remain a government agency and not become a private org.

costs outweight the benifits? how much can it cost to rent a movie studio and build a cardboard spaceship?

thanks prensa, i fixed the link, try again.

Eh. The whole space program has always been a political maneuver (it was a big part of the Cold War, and so forth); this does not take away from the advances in technology that have sprung from it - like your PCs, your CD/DVD players, etc.

right-o, tuffy and it is crucial the we as a nation remain the forerunners, what with the chines launching rockets now too...don't let those commie bastards stick their flag in the red planet first!

what's the big deal about getting to mars first? sure it's a pretty big step, but really has little to no connotations for further development of the US as a nation. now if there was a combined effort on the parts of all space-faring nations, i'd be all for it, as it would be more of a scientific achievement than a political or economically impacting achievement.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Prensa Taladradora [/i]
[B]right-o, tuffy and it is crucial the we as a nation remain the forerunners, what with the chines launching rockets now too...don't let those commie bastards stick their flag in the red planet first! [/B][/QUOTE] You forgot Korea. And the French.

[b][i]The FRENCH!!![/i][/b]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by trypdwyre [/i]
[B]but really has little to no connotations for further development of the US as a nation.[/B][/QUOTE] True, but it will advance several large corporations. Always look behind the curtain to see where the $$$ is flowing. Lockheed Martin Corp./ILS, GE, Microsoft... all these and many others have stakes in a successful Mars landing.

But Korea and France don't have rocket ships, China does.

as for getting there first... well we are not crazy communists. I think we would remain diplomatic and use the exploitation of Mars for the betterment of humanity, whereas the Chinese might just use it to try to bring the US to its knees. I'm reaching here, I know, but I don't trust those sneaky bastards...

*edit for sp.

indeed they do, but how much is our economy suffering for it? it's costing more money from the government than these comapnies will be able to make up, especially since the budget for the space program is ongoing.

I don't believe our economy is suffering because we have a space program. I believe our economy is suffering because is it poorly managed by people who still think you can spend more than you have. But it's all on paper anyway, there will always be more money.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Prensa Taladradora [/i]
[B]But Korea and France don't have rocket ships, China does.[/B][/QUOTE] Korea and France both have rockets capable of leaving our atmosphere. As do Russia, Israel, India, Algeria, Japan, Australia, Canada, Taiwan, Brazil, Germany, the UK, and I am sure several others. If, by "rocket ships", you mean manned landing vehicles, then you're down to (currently) the USA and Russia, and any of the above-mentioned countries could acquire landers fairly easily (NASA would be glad to build one to spec for most of the above.)

Economy: Our current space program budget is the lowest it has been since its inception (too many failures lately.) Which is why the success of the two Mars rovers is so crucial to NASA/JPL. Success may mean more funding.

our economy is suffering because they keep dropping $15,000,000,000.00 annually on NASA alone. and NASA only makes up a percentage of the space budget.
so yea, imagine even 25% of the space budget being flooded back into our economy, it's a pretty good start for the american economy.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Tuffy the Dump Truck [/i]
[B]Economy: Our current space program budget is the lowest it has been since its inception (too many failures lately.) Which is why the success of the two Mars rovers is so crucial to NASA/JPL. Success may mean more funding. [/B][/QUOTE]
yes, their budget depends on this next year. i still think, despite the advancements they've made, that it's too ridiculous of an amount to spend on sending people to the moon and to mars, and nothing really coming of it.

How about just manned space flights? I thought Russia, the U.S. and China were the only ones to have achieved them.

how can you say "nothing really coming of it"? Nothing?

I think anything we can learn about how our nearby planets and moons came to be tells us so much about how earth came to be which directly leads us to how we came to be which is the most important question there is. By asking that question we define our existence.

You talk like 15 billion was a lot of money. The outstanding Public Debt is currently:
[img]http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/debtc.gif[/img]

15 bil is a tiny drop in a very large bucket. You could just as well say, "If we disbanded the military, think of all the money we would save." And you would be right. Doesn't mean it's a good idea, or that it would do anything but actually harm the economy.

The National Debt has continued to increase an average of $2.12 billion [b]per day[/b] since September 30, 2003. So, eliminating NASA entirely would save us, oh, about a week.

Yeah, but what does that really mean, "the outstanding public debt"? To whom exactly do we owe this money? And who exactly is the "we" that owes this money? I'm not asking you to explain it, but doesn't it seem very theoretical to you? I mean if I owed anywhere near that amount, my debtors would cancel my account, but "we" still have money to spend and money coming in all the time. That figure is meaningless to me.

I think your point is that we totally can afford to have a space program though, because compared to that figure, whet we want to spend on space stuff is almost insignificant, correct?

Now back to China and how they are in the big three and all those other countries you listed are not even in the running.

indeed, it is a drop in the bucket. and yes, things do come out of space exploration. those things were never in question here. what is in question is [i]is the budget for the space program justifiable enough to make the benefits outweigh it's costs?[/i]
and my personal [b]opinion[/b] that the money being wasted on trying to land a man on mars could be better utilized by the education system, and other systems struggling to get by on what they have. space exploration would be more beneficial were it in the hands of private companies/organizations due to the advancement in technology, and the lack of expenditure on the part of the US government.

What do you mean by "other systems struggling to get by on what they have?" please elaborate

Lets put the education system in the hands of private companies/organizations? Now THERE's a revolution, baby!

And I don't think anything outweighs the benefit of solving the mysteries of the universe. But that's just me.

you're right, that is just you. personally i would prefer to see the educational system recieve a boost, because what good is a space program if the next generation only knows how to retread tires?
you can't put the entire educational system in the hands of the private sector, it's an impossability, the majority of children wouldn't be able to recieve schooling, and that would be the only worse thing to have happen to our educational system possable.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Prensa Taladradora [/i]
[B]What do you mean by "other systems struggling to get by on what they have?" please elaborate

Lets put the education system in the hands of private companies/organizations? Now THERE's a revolution, baby!

And I don't think anything outweighs the benefit of solving the mysteries of the universe. But that's just me. [/B][/QUOTE]
p.s. name one "mystery of the universe" that has been solved by space exploration? space exploration began out of curiosity, and ended with the race to the moon, after that it was all politics.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by trypdwyre [/i]
[B]and my personal [b]opinion[/b] that the money being wasted on trying to land a man on mars could be better utilized by the education system, and other systems struggling to get by on what they have. space exploration would be more beneficial were it in the hands of private companies/organizations due to the advancement in technology, and the lack of expenditure on the part of the US government. [/B][/QUOTE] And I am inclined to agree with you on these points.

Um, I'll begin with:

1. the earth is not flat

2. the earth is not the center of the universe

3. there are no little green men living on the moon, nor is the moon made of cheese.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Prensa Taladradora [/i]
[B]Yeah, but what does that really mean, "the outstanding public debt"? To whom exactly do we owe this money? And who exactly is the "we" that owes this money? I'm not asking you to explain it, but doesn't it seem very theoretical to you? I mean if I owed anywhere near that amount, my debtors would cancel my account, but "we" still have money to spend and money coming in all the time. That figure is meaningless to me.[/b][/QUOTE] Highschool civics. National Debt - the amout of money spent by your country over the Gross National Product. Your share comes to 23 grand and change. I'm assuming that you're in the US, of course, but all nations have a GNP/ND issue.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Prensa Taladradora [/i]
[B]Lets put the education system in the hands of private companies/organizations? Now THERE's a revolution, baby![/B][/QUOTE] Terrible idea, but that's another thread.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Prensa Taladradora [/i]
[B]Um, I'll begin with:

1. the earth is not flat

2. the earth is not the center of the universe

3. there are no little green men living on the moon, nor is the moon made of cheese. [/B][/QUOTE]
and what space exploration solved these mysteries? i always thought that they were solved from the ground

1.Aristotle proved the earth was round by noting the curved shadow that it cast upon the eclipsed moon. He pointed out that this shadow was round no matter where the eclipse took place, whether the moon was high in the sky or low near the horizon. The only object that can cast a round shadow from every angle is a sphere.
2.Copernicus theorized that the earth wasn't flat back in the 1500s, and was proven by Galileo in the early 1600s.
3.the telescope took care of this, not to mention the scientific community never thinking there were green men on the moon, or the moon being made out of cheese. those are what's called "science fiction" ideas, meaning, there was no credibility with them to begin with.

To me, all your explanations fall under space exploration.

If they don't to you, and you are giving 'space exploration' the narrow definition of "[only information gathered from] objects or people that have left the surface of the earth" then you are telling me you don't believe we have learned a single thing more about how things work by leaving the surface of the earth than if we had just stayed here and looked up.

same page yet, you and I?

ok then, tell which one of those 3 was funded by space exploration? come to think of it, if you still want to define that as space exploration, they all would fall under the category of private sector space exploration, which is what i want to see. what you want is to see that things stay the same, the same minor advancements made and billions wasted in doing it.
no, not the same page.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Tuffy the Dump Truck [/i]
[B]The issue isn't really putting a man on Mars, it's putting [b]equipment[/b] on Mars. [/B][/QUOTE]

Actually, the issue was putting a flag on Mars. A red commie flag on the red planet.

That would be Astronomy. Not space exploration.

[url]www.seti.org[/url] is your friend.
So is [url]http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/.[/url] There are other non-seti astronomy groups, but SETI is thje best if you want to find the little green men. Actually... far more likely to find any signs of non-terrestrial intelligent life (should it happen to exist) than through actual one-planet-at-a-time space exploration.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Prensa Taladradora [/i]
[B]Actually, the issue was putting a flag on Mars. A red commie flag on the red planet. [/B][/QUOTE]
i didn't know people were still anti-communism to the point where "commie" is still a derogatory term...

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Prensa Taladradora [/i]
[B]Actually, the issue was putting a flag on Mars. A red commie flag on the red planet. [/B][/QUOTE] There have been flags on Mars since the early 70's.

i have a dream.

Does it relate to your sigbanner in any way? If so, I don't wanna know about it....

Fine, what is space exploration according to you two?

Is it "[only information gathered from] objects or people that have left the surface of the earth" or what?

To me astrology is space exploration, and if not why not?

It all started somewhere and it all leads to the same place, i.e. answering questions about the origins and ultimately the future of our universe.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Tuffy the Dump Truck [/i]
[B]That would be Astronomy. Not space exploration.

[url]www.seti.org[/url] is your friend.
So is [url]http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/.[/url] There are other non-seti astronomy groups, but SETI is thje best if you want to find the little green men. Actually... far more likely to find any signs of non-terrestrial intelligent life (should it happen to exist) than through actual one-planet-at-a-time space exploration. [/B][/QUOTE]
quite right

i'm all for space exploration.
but your commie jokes really suck.

tryp and tuffy are the winners.
over & out.

yeah well your gaynigger thing sucks more

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Prensa Taladradora [/i]
[B]Fine, what is space exploration according to you two?

Is it "[only information gathered from] objects or people that have left the surface of the earth" or what?

To me astrology is space exploration, and if not why not?

It all started somewhere and it all leads to the same place, i.e. answering questions about the origins and ultimately the future of our universe. [/B][/QUOTE]
i was point out that your "examples" don't count because they do not relate directly to what we're talking about, which is funding and results. the 3 items you listed were not funded by the government in question, nor are they good examples because they embody exactly what we're talking about. space exploration in the hands of the private sector.
to me astrology is astrology. space exploration is "the exploration of outer space" exploration is defined as "to travel for the purpose of discovery" or "traveling in a region previously unknown or little known to learn of its people, animals, resources, etc"
how do you define it? anything that even mentions space? that doesn't cover it, there's astronomy, astrology, physics, etc.. those all aren't "space exploration".

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Prensa Taladradora [/i]
[B]Fine, what is space exploration according to you two?

Is it "[only information gathered from] objects or people that have left the surface of the earth" or what?

To me astrology is space exploration, and if not why not?

It all started somewhere and it all leads to the same place, i.e. answering questions about the origins and ultimately the future of our universe. [/B][/QUOTE]

I'll say it - [b]Astronomy[/b], not astrology [which is horoscopes.]

"answering questions about the origins and ultimately the future of our universe." This can largely be done from earth (or orbit) using various types of telescopes. Our knowledge of everything outside of Earth - just through Hubble - has gone up a hundred-fold in the last ten years. Without any people going anywhere near "space" (in this case, outside orbit.)

you wish.
at least i'm not trying to refute actual arguments with it.
they bring up point after point and you just say,
commies gonna get us! ha!

hint: it's not working.

T&T: i don't really have much to add to the actual debate. you two have everything pretty much covered. privatization seems promising. okay, so here's a question - what do you think would happen if it was privatized? do you think it would be dangerous - ie: increasing the power of certain corporations too much? opening up more room for monopolies to pop up/expand?

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Tuffy the Dump Truck [/i]
[B]There have been flags on Mars since the early 70's. [/B][/QUOTE]

Educate me.

he just did.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Prensa Taladradora [/i]
[B]Educate me. [/B][/QUOTE]

[url]http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/chronology_mars.html[/url]