Posted on 12/15/2006 9:08:45 AM PST by truthfinder9
We must stop the U.S. Administration from foisting this disastrous anti-science, antiexploration agenda on NASA. I want to help the Society fend off these attacks that are threatening both space science and human and robotic exploration of other worlds.
PETITION TO PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH
Your administration's proposal to cut the budget for NASA's Space Science and exploration programs will inflict long-term, possibly irreparable, harm to the future of space exploration.
Your own Vision for Space Exploration is being distorted. This budget, if passed, threatens to cancel decades of vital exploration, the very thing that gains the United States international respect and admiration. What's more, in allowing NASA to alter its own mission statement to eliminate the phrase "to understand and protect the Earth," your administration has discarded an absolutely essential component of the space program.
"They have become so fat with public money over the years they have abandoned finance philosophies that govern private companies."
Take a look around at the government agencies - IIRC, NASA is the only one asked to adhere to financial philosophies akin to private companies. Hence, they get hammered for ANY financial blunder, since they are the test case and are in the spotlight.
"Richard Branson (Virgin Air) launched two successive missions to space within 10 days of each."
Technically, he bought into a launch system as a majority investor, he did not develop the system.
The missions two days apart were suborbital and carried no useful payload. That is an easier launch regime than shuttle, CEV, or any of our other unmanned launches to Earth orbit and beyond. The mechanics and complexities increase dramatically to hit orbit, and then do so again when you try to carry cargo. Am I saying that SS1 is worthless? No way, it was a milestone, and I cheered as much as anybody when they crossed that milestone. I am saying it is not a good example of how private space is oh so much more efficient.
"It's time to let REAL private companies lead the way to space and planetary exploration and let unaccountable slushes like NASA go the way of the dinosaur."
NASA is a very lean organization as government entities go. Get rid of something like the unrestrained welfare system, then you might be on to something.
BTW, what do you think happens to the NASA budget if NASA goes away? Do you think you get it back??
Hahahahhhhaaaaaaaaaaa!!!
Maybe so, but fortunately the Chinese aren't any more optimistic about finding significant quantities of usable water on the moon than we are. They have no problem with the Treaty, of course, since the Treaty has worked well to stop American space development, the only space development even possible, for going on thirty years while the slugs of the world crawl toward the light.
NASA's share of the federal budget is similar to the Lewis and Clark expedition. Exploration has always been a national goal because it leads to growth. The Solar System is the New World without the natives. Our rivals understand that.
What about the Treaty?
Terminate NASA and leave the Treaty in place. Great idea. That would guarantee no space development by either private or public sector.
Send Eileen Collins to Mars.....now!!!
The Treaty: address that.
Screw the Treaty.
Insufficient. The Treaty is in place.
That is not true.
Who would have thought 200 years ago that we would be drilling for oil in 10,000 feet of water? The Great Plains were once labeled on maps as an unhabitable desert. The resources of the Moon and asteroids will belong to whoever gets there first to claim them. Look at what happened to the countries that spent enormous sums exploring and claiming the New World. You don't care to immigrate? No problem. Last time I looked there were plenty of people who stayed in the Old World while our ancestors immigrated here. BTW, I agree that we should rely more on private enterprise because it is generally more efficient than government. Oh yeah...ref your comment on the crack pipe, can we please keep it civil on FR? I don't insult fellow Freepers just because I disagree with them.
"Ok, now were in to semantics."
I figured it was fair game, since you were already into name-dropping. Actually, I had a bigger point than the semantic: SS1 was not sprung fully formed from Rutan's genius, and Branson is limited to being an admitedly srewd and visionary businessman. SS1 rides on the back of much government research, and not just NASA. Rutan just had the guts and brains to make it all happen, and I salute him for it.
"What's useful about a ketchup bottle and two Nat's? Where's the experiments that are benefiting us?"
First, what's a Nat?
Second, what the hell are you talking about with a ketchup bottle?
Third, the ISS itself as a construction project points the way to how we will get to Mars with people, whether business does it someday or not. I am certain that business will INDEED take over and get space developed much faster, when it establishes itself. Good luck in finding a commercial business plan, let alone an actual existing company, that is willing or capable to investigate on-orbit construction.
People like you have become so dramatically misled about NASA's mission, which started out as a technology search in getting people into space and exploring. It was not originaly envisioned as the land of the labcoats, and it was at its most efficient when it put people into space as often as it could, just to find out how to do it better the next time.
I have had a project or two where we actually built something for NASA (one of them is on the ISS right now). I would, under no circumstances of the wildest stretch, agree with your statement....
This is quite a stretch and irrelevant to the discussion of shutting down NASA while private industry is also shut out of space development.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.