DUBYA'S NOT JUST HOWLING AT THE MOON

New York Post ^ | 12/05/03 | BRIAN BLOMQUIST

[DeuceTraveler]

I would enjoy us having a new space vision.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Washington Post headline: Return to Moon Tops List Of Big '04 Ideas for Bush ***Vice President Cheney recently discussed possibilities with lawmakers with jurisdiction over the space program but did not tip his hand. Options that have been considered by the administration include a permanent outpost on the moon and a human mission to Mars. Although much of the scientific and emotional focus has been on Mars over the past decade, the buzz inside NASA has seemed to shift toward a return of man to the moon, officials at the space agency said.

"The drumbeat is getting louder," Wendell Mendell, manager of the Office for Human Exploration Science at NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston, said in a telephone interview. Mendell has long advocated a return to the moon. "The tables and lists being created here are consistent" with a lunar initiative, he said.

NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe has steadfastly declined to discuss the ongoing review of space policy, except to acknowledge that it is "moving forward."

Edward Weiler, NASA's chief of space sciences, said in an interview yesterday that he commissioned a major study to determine space science priorities, which was completed by a panel of the National Academy of Sciences earlier this year. "I was surprised that the moon turned out to be one of their targets," he said. The panel listed the moon as one of five prime targets, he said, primarily because a crater at its South Pole contains some of the oldest, if not the oldest, exposed material in the solar system.

Advocates have argued that the moon could be useful in many other ways, as a base for developing technologies, for astronomical observations and for human rehearsals for operating in space. One person consulted by the White House said officials think a renewed push into space would fuel the manufacturing and technology sectors of the economy. *** Printable version

[Fledermaus]

I think that unless there is something specific tied to a goal, this will be ridiculed beyond control.

I can see Jay Leno now..."So Bush wants to spend billions of scarce tax money to go back to the moon. Are we out of rocks?" or something even stupider (I'm not a writer! lol).

And a pronouncement of putting a permanent base on the moon won't work when our space station is stalled, over budget, over time and pretty much worthless.

Now, if he calls for a radio telescope to be built on the dark side of the moon by those at a permanent base and/or a supply base for a moon orbital panel that will launch a vehcile to Mars, then I'm all for it.

[DeuceTraveler]

I do think that it would have been more worthy an effort to put the international space station on the moon versus in orbit. A lot more research to be done that could prepare us for a Mars visit.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

NASA may take trip back to moon*** Under consideration are:

· A decision on how long to keep operating the space station and shuttle, which could include phasing out the shuttle fleet sometime in the next decade. One option being studied is the use of the shuttle as an unmanned cargo carrier.

· A long-term reliance on commercial launch vehicles, with no plans for the government to build a full-blown shuttle replacement.

· Major changes to -- or the abandonment of -- a program to build an orbital space plane intended to ferry crews and cargo to the station.

· Greater cooperation between civilian space programs at NASA and military space projects at the Department of Defense.

· Acceleration of an existing effort to develop nuclear-powered rockets, which would allow space missions to fly faster and farther.

"We are looking at some significant sea changes," NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe told a NASA Advisory Council meeting Wednesday, without providing additional details.

The goal is to finalize a specific plan next year. Many of the elements would simply build on existing programs; the White House reportedly would budget about $200 million in 2005 for NASA to come up with the blueprint.

O'Keefe said no conclusions have been reached, and Bush will make the ultimate decision on how to proceed.***

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Visionaries Hope NASA Charts Bold Course ***Rep. Bart Gordon, D-Tenn., a senior member of the House Science Committee, also favors a human return to the moon and a Dec. 17 pronouncement. He said he made his views known last month to Vice President Dick Cheney, who quietly is heading up a task force on the future of spaceflight. The congressman said Cheney didn't show the administration's hand.

Gordon sees Mars as a drawn-out affair, and "you can't keep Americans' attention or Congress' appropriation focused on a 20-year goal." The moon, on the other hand, "is an obtainable goal on a reasonable time frame," he said Thursday.

Besides, other countries like China have their eyes on the moon, Gordon noted, and "we don't want to not be there." ***

[Moonman62]

The goal is to finalize a specific plan next year. Many of the elements would simply build on existing programs; the White House reportedly would budget about $200 million in 2005 for NASA to come up with the blueprint.

The study alone is going to cost $200 million. Why don't they just build a new rocket that burns hundred dollar bills?

[Moonman62]

I think that unless there is something specific tied to a goal, this will be ridiculed beyond control.

Apparently, the $100 billion we're spending on the ISS as a make work project for the shuttle isn't enough.

[Moonman62]

"We don't want to wake up too late one day and say, 'Uh oh.' We don't want somebody else to get there first," Gordon told The Post.

We already got there first. This is like reliving the 1960's and the Great Society all over again.

[Aracelis]

We've got our eyes on Mars...what better place to practice for such an endeavor than the Moon? Let's GO!!!!

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

Moon Outpost W.04.USA. Bumps

[Fledermaus]

I find that funny from Bart Gordon. The people of his district have been sending him to Congress for almost 20 years, except the 4 years he was out after he lost to Fred Thompson in 1994! lol

He was as condenscending to his constituents even then.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

This time to stay. Not to go, would be irresponsible both econmically and militarily.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Astronaut James Irwin salutes a U.S. flag planted on the surface of the moon during the Apollo 15 mission in this August, 1971 file photo. The lunar module is at center with Hadley Delta in the background, and the lunar rover vehicle driven by the astronauts waits at right. After decades of watching astronauts circle Earth, space visionaries finally have reason for optimism: NASA (news - web sites) and other agencies are working with the White House on a bold, new course of exploration. (AP Photo/NASA, File)

[Moonman62]

Why? Would it had saved any of our soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan, or prevented 9-11?

[Moonman62]

I should also ask you to explain why it's good economics.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

If we'd had the technology we have today, would we have lost as many men in WWI, WWII, Korea, and Vietnam?

[Miss Marple]

The Chinese are going into space. To ignore this and cede control of the moon to them would be foolish in the extreme.

Besides, we need to set our gaze on the stars, rather than inward.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Good economics because it will lead to making the Moon a filling station on the way to the planets. It will boost the educational level of our population, secure our military and commercial space assets, create jobs, advance technology and feed a nation hungry for an exploration vision.