Compare NASA's budget with that of the Dept of Health and Human Services. In light of what NASA has accomplished shouldn't we all then be completely healthy?
Posted on 04/06/2010 8:12:36 AM PDT by Names Ash Housewares
Keith's note: This video shows Neil deGrasse Tyson speaking at the University at Buffalo making an impassioned plea for NASA and the value it has to all Americans. In my experience, no one has ever managed to capture this in such a cogent response. Tyson is the sort of people who should be speaking at the OSTP space summit. But no. Politics preside. Instead, its OSTP Vs NSC and OSTP/NSC Vs NASA and a food fight over who gets to say what NASA needs to do at the Summit. What a colossal missed opportunity.
(Excerpt) Read more at nasawatch.com ...
We need to get this guy on the road. He knows how to speakm to the masses.
Can I join the Texas-Florida Starfleet as well, just imagine, we could build a moon colony which would be exempt from the oppressive UN laws of the earth, and if Earth gets uppity about there are plenty of rocks to throw back....
The Moon is a Harsh Mistress...
In the years of the Soviet Union, an interesting dichotomy took place in science.
In the Soviet Union, a scientist could only advance through discovery. His rewards were professional, not personal. For this reason, their scientific community had a bias towards “pure science”, and had little interest in useful technology or commercialization.
In the US, scientists were motivated to examine discoveries in light of their practical uses and commercial technologies. By doing so, a scientist could become wealthy, which was generally more valued than professional recognition.
So the bottom line was that Soviet scientists discovered a lot of new things, and American scientists used discoveries to make things.
This is what we find in NASA today. As a government program, they are far more interested in new discoveries, than in practical use of, or exploitation of those discoveries. And while this results in increasing human knowledge, it doesn’t do much beyond that.
A private corporation, on the other hand, is far more interested in the practical nature of discoveries, of recovering their costs, and even making a profit from their accomplishments.
So what does this mean in space exploration? In the case of exploring Mars, for example, NASA has made a brilliant breakthrough with its two Martian rovers, which discovered all sorts of things. But instead of using that knowledge, their follow-up idea is to send another rover. Larger than the first two, but still just a rover.
Given the same situation, a private company would also send a robot. But not a rover. Likely a robot designed to create a horizontal tunnel habitat on Mars.
The rationale would not be to discover new things, very much, but the practical creation of a habitat that could be used again and again, even expanded into a colony. To do so would save enormous amounts of money, and allow Martian exploration to be done over months, instead of just days.
Not just reinventing the wheel, as it were, but investing in the future in real terms, not just with new knowledge.
Eventually, NASA would likely end up renting the habitat, so that when they sent astronauts to Mars, they would have someplace to stay, while doing their pure science.
OK.
We keep watching for incoming asteroids.
We keep improving access to low earth orbit.
We find ways to address crappy education without spending billions to create “heroes.”
I’ll have to say that I agree and disagree with him. The NASA of his vision is a pretty wonderful thing. However the NASA of reality, mired in incompetence and political expediency won’t attain his vision. There would have to be a vigorous housecleaning before NASA could accomplish a fraction of what he envisions.
You can be quite sure that such a housecleaning would ruffle too many political feathers to happen. At best we should hope that deregulation of private space efforts could be pushed so maybe more can be accomplished in that area. There has yet to be a federal bureaucracy which hasn’t stagnated and calcified with age. NASA was a lean and mean machine when founded. We don’t have that NASA anymore. Now it is a place of padded nests and politically correct science.
Compare NASA's budget with that of the Dept of Health and Human Services. In light of what NASA has accomplished shouldn't we all then be completely healthy?
“Get your head out of the clouds and stop justifying gross spending by government “just because.””
I am never “just because” on anything this serious.
Exloration of frontiers of all kinds is critical for our nation’s future.
It is why any of us are here at all.
China is flying people now.
Perhaps we should stand down and let them dominate the high frontier? let them inspire their youth?
let them exploit lunar helium 3 and future revolutionary energy sources?
No thanks. God no. Hell no.
Astronaut Story Musgrave.....
“We have been a frontier culture. We were born out of exploration, we were born out of adventure. We were born out of the plains and the mountains. We’ve been a very physical kind of culture. And so, if you look at adventure, if you look at exploration, if you look at immersion in nature, a physical culture, and all those things, you can see directly how space flight relates to the way America has been born and how it evolved.”
“You have to keep pushing the frontier not
just because it’s there, but because that’s how we find things that end up changing humanity,” -Paul Hill, Mission Control
It would be better to put those scientists and that money into solving energy problems..Efficient transportation of goods and services.
NASA Scientists want carte blanche to pursue things that while interesting do not immediately and directly address serious problems the US faces..
How many GI’s lives would be saved if the tax payers money spent studying quarks went into developing utralight armor.. and effective cross country capable efficient Tracked Vehicles..
How many lives would be saved and how many people could benifit if the monies NASA spends were focused on the direct and immediate interests of the American People..
I may like to go fishing (engage in esoteric scientific studies) but when the wolf is at the door... I best deal with the wolf first.
These NASA big brains do not give a crap about Unemployment of the average Joe...lack of Productivity and Industry in the US.
Quite frankly the US Military Brass also spend like drunken sailors also. Unwilling to use the platforms we have they insist on buying new crap which quite often does not work as well as the piece of hardware it replaces.
We all appreciate what NASA has done and if things were different it would make sense for US to continue supporting their efforts fully.
However, they need to clue in. Give the rest of us a hand for a while. Do things that enhance the security and prosperity of the US and our people.
We put the money into them when we had it and now it is time for them to buckle down and work on improving the US economy and technologies directly for a while..
Otherwise they need to find some private donors to pay the freight and get off our backs.
W
Now, instead of going to the moon and Mars, they suddenly learn that their new mission will be an "Earth mission" where they get to send down Administration-approved data from space, showing how Brazilian mudflats are expanding declining because of global warming cooling and that crippling shackles must be put on American industry to save the planet.
Maybe if they kept the agency's mission focused on space exploration instead of political agendas, they would still be exploring new frontiers instead of carrying water for luddite leftists.
Yup, I’m against almost all of the programs you list.
Apparently, you like them.
“We don’t have that NASA anymore. Now it is a place of padded nests and politically correct science.”
Do NOT let the likes of Hansen define our nations most critical and pioneering agency.
Without it, we die as leader of the free world.
Or perhaps you prefer China and Russia to determine the course of human history?
No, NASA did not bring it upon themselves.
DC has consistantly underfunded an agency that when properly funded produces literally... miracles.
I think you meant to have “stirring music” playing in the background as that was read, right? Maybe the theme from “Patton” or “Independence Day?”
Let private individuals or companies run with this and stop squandering taxpayer monies. Yes, NASA does this, even paying $66 a person for snacks at, ironically, a symposium on cost reductions at NASA.
http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2010/03/26/Report-NASA-spends-too-much-on-snacks/UPI-64571269631814/
No, I’m sorry, your arguments fall flat.
Bare in mind also, most of NASA’s budget does go to human spaceflight. Shuttles eat the most money. Not earht studies. Which of course we should be doing, no matter what AGW theory says.
There is a sad right wing lazy myth that all NASA does is global warming propaganda.
Snap out of it. It’s not the case.
No. I'm sorry. your arguements fail to convince.
One of the most respected conservatives on this forum on the matter.....
"Nowhere is this more important than our next frontier: space. Nowhere do we so effectively demonstrate our technological leadership and ability to make life better on Earth. The Space Age is barely a quarter of a century old. But already we've pushed civilization forward with our advances in science and technology. Opportunities and jobs will multiply as we cross new thresholds of knowledge and reach deeper into the unknown.
Our progress in space, taking giant steps for all mankind, is a tribute to American teamwork and excellence. Our finest minds in government, industry and academia have all pulled together. And we can be proud to say: We are first; we are the best; and we are so because we're free. "America has always been greatest when we dared to be great. We can reach for greatness again. We can follow our dreams to distant stars, living and working in space for peaceful, economic, and scientific gain." -Ronald Wilson Reagan
You want to argue against Reagan on this? Be my guest! LOL Sometimes some of you guys paint yourselves into poltiical corners you miss the big picture. Things are larger then politics sometimes.
The real NAZA died sometime in the mid 70s, when the shuttle program became the only game in town. NASA itself hasn’t done REAL basic research in three decades, especially after ‘Star Wars’ got emasculated.
The only thing we have going for us now ARE the private companies; they’re the only ones doing SSTO and basic engineering to lower costs to LEO. NASA has been a white-collar welfare program for years. Best it dies a rapid and ingominious death now.
YOu have no Idea how sad that makes me to say that...
How did you come up with that? All I did was post a chart.
I don't contend that that is "all they do," just that they do it, and it should have no place in their mission.
Here's one of their websites with all the IPCC "findings" and talking points about Bush rejecting Kyoto, the need for carbon credits, the value of tree ring data, etc.:
The Ups and Downs of Global Warming
I very much value their space exploration work and think that they should stick to that, if they ever get the funding for it again.
>Do NOT let the likes of Hansen define our nations most critical and pioneering agency.
I’m not the one letting him define it, they are.
>Without it, we die as leader of the free world.
With it we could die as the leader of the free world if our economy collapses. Another robotic probe to wherever isn’t going to do bumpkiss. As for manned exploration, NASA dropped that ball a very long time ago and dumped all its money into the debacle that is the Space Shuttle. That vehicle was an ill conceived investment which sucked up so much money that NASA could never afford to build a replacement. Heck then again they never even could design a proper replacement so it’s all pretty moot.
>Or perhaps you prefer China and Russia to determine the course of human history?
Considering the recent track record of NASA outside of unmanned vehicles (and not all of those have been successes), throwing money at an agency that doesn’t produce isn’t exactly going to leapfrog the opposition.
Until you have a housecleaning of the agency, throwing more money at it is about as prudent as funding a Barney Frank memorial.
Answer me a couple questions:
What manned launcher tech has NASA developed recently which actually looks promising?
What new general launching technology has NASA developed in the last 30 years?
(hint the answer is pretty much zilch)
Stolen dreams
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.