Obama: 8 Billion For High-Speed Rail, 0 for NASA & JSC

Hell, even the jingoistic argument falls on its face there. Care to guess what the "I" in ISS stands for? Hint: It ain't I-merica.

 

And that is the heart of the failure of the manned spaceflight program, the ISS, exists so that the space shuttle program or its successor has somewhere to fly, and the space shuttle program exists so that ISS people have a ride.

In between, they spend their time recreating what went on at Skylab during the 70's.

 

If they can continue research for a moon mission, why is Orion project getting canned or the Altair Lunar Lander? I am assuming that you are not familiar with the technical side of space exploration. There is no "research" to be done to head back to the moon. The trajectory componant will pretty much be the exact as the Apollo era. The design of the Ares rockets are complete but need to be fully built, man-rated, and tested. That is where the cost comes in. Even the software component is in beta testing. The plan is in place and has been in place for a while. You really can't do anymore research per say.

 

This is so full of truth. I've just talked to way too many people at NASA who were shaking their heads in the 70's and 80's at the whole obvious plan.

Design something that will require recurring costs of indefinite or infinite duration = making sure you have a congressional budget line. That's the basic core truth of shuttle<->station duality. In its earliest days, yes, they talked of using it as a platform for more ambitious and boundary-pushing exploration. But the final ISS product can't do that.

ISS has the scientific mission of ... I mean just look for yourself . I don't want to get nasty about it, but this is not big science or important science. This is the scientific mission of one small department in a 3rd-tier science university. (I would know!)
How can we detect pollutants in zero g?!
Earth observing ... that very cheap satellites already do!

The material science angle was kind of interesting, but it's been promised for years and the first module just went up in September.

It all makes B-Bob very sad! I think I will stop, as I literally spring from the agency, once upon a time. Sad to give it this close a look. Ugh-ness.

 

And it would have been cheaper to simply build a new Hubble. Or does cost not matter anymore?

Jingoism is when you substitute pictures of stadiums for an argument. Cuz you have none.

 

Yes but I did get the results from this important experiment!:

 

Check yo'self fool. I'm just preaching free market magic.

 

If there's a need for the product the free market will provide. If there's no need for it, we shouldn't be spending more tax dollars on it in a recession.

 

are you pro-bailout?

 

Well, that's not completely fair. There's no true (above ground) market for killing machines, but the federal government decides it is a priority and will make itself the market, thereby creating an industry that takes the lion's share of our tax dollars.

So you could take the NASA budget, and with some transition, put it out to bid, I guess. That has already been happening, piecemeal.

 

Not to mention the fact that John McCain denounced this very strategy during the campaign.

So if Shovel Face hates Obama and disagrees with a key McCain point, then who would run that could actually make him happy?

 

Except that, from the map posted earlier, there will not be a Houston to Dallas route.

 

Sure you can. You are just looking narrowly at it in terms of that the programs were previously proposed are only the possible ways of getting to the Moon whereas you can always continue researching other options. While it will definately take funding to implement other options doesn't mean you can't continue coming up with other ideas.

 

So provinciality is your measure of necessity?

 

Which one employs more people?

 

The decayed remains of Ronald Reagan.

Those were the days.

 

Not Ron Paul either