Trip to Mars - Keeping it in the family.

[corkyking]

Does anyone else find the following just a little disturbing?

CBS News:
For those hungering to move humanity beyond the confines of Earth orbit, the words from U.S. President George Bush are clear and decisive: "Back to the Moon; back to the future. And this time, back to stay. And then a journey into tomorrow, a journey to another planet: a manned mission to Mars." But these words are historical artifact, uttered over 14 years ago by President George Bush, Senior.

President (G.W.) Bush, envisioning "new journeys to the worlds beyond our own," unveiled a plan Wednesday to send astronauts to the moon, Mars and beyond on missions sure to cost hundreds of billions of dollars and stretch the bounds of technology.

He said it would cost $12 billion over the next five years, but only $1 billion in new funds. The remainder would come from money reallocated under NASA's five-year budget. Thus, it would be for Bush's successors to figure out how to finance the costliest part of the plan.

By Steven Siceloff
FLORIDA TODAY:
Kennedy Space Center would see its budget bumped up $77 million to just under $1 billion. Johnson Space Center would still command the largest budget, almost $4.5 billion next year.

JSC: Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Houston, TEXAS

KSC: John F. Kennedy Space Center
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Kennedy Space Center, FLORIDA

[ampersat]

Sure, it's a little underhanded to propose building Rome in a decade and leave the biggest part of the job to someone else. On the other hand, no great accomplishment was ever made without great plans. It will be up to future administrations to take this plan and guide it along. Bush himself won't be going to Mars and he won't be the only person to take credit for the accomplishment when that first foot print is made on the red planet.

And lots of great technology will be developed out of it, I'm sure. I'm also sure that it will end up being sold to the American public by way of Japanese and German goods, with the profits of the transaction streaming out of our country.

I'm also a little confused on what exactly it is we would be trying to accomplish with this endeavor. We've got a rover on Mars and another one on the way now. There's a lot of science that we can do remotely. We also have a capsule of dust from a comet that is due to come back to Earth sometime next year. If we can get comet dust into our labs, why aren't we trying to get samples from Mars back to Earth? The only real reason I can come up with for sending humans to Mars would be the technological advancements that would come out of it. While laudable as a goal in itself, I can't say that it's entirely worth it.

In the end, if it were up to me, putting a person on Mars would be pretty low on my list of fiscal priorities. I think there are far more responsible ways to spend the money we can't really afford to spend in the first place.

[1pump]

Don't get me wrong, space exploration is great. We'll never know what's out there unless we go take a peek.

BUT- We have huge domestic problems right here at home, on our own planet, and in our own country.

If we don't fund our schools, there won't be a next generation of scientists and engineers to develop the technology to build a space program.

And hey, get the wealthy "space tourists" on board. I'm sure Gates, Buffet, or somebody like them wouldn't mind coughing up a few mil for a first class ticket to the moon or beyond.

Better yet, let's yank PETA's chain and send some chimps. :smile:

[lost_sailor]

Well, Bush got his name in the same paragraphs as "JFK" - that's what it's all about anyway.

It's going to be a fun year - my money's on Osama "captured" on Sept. 11!

In 2006, Bush crowns himself emperor.



[ 01-16-2004, 07:53 AM: Message edited by: lost_sailor ]

[Lured In]

LS...way to avoid picking a fight. [img]graemlins/berry.gif[/img]

I wonder if the same fiscal irresponsibility could be said about the first mission to the moon? All the effort that went into it, the lives lost in developing the technology. I would imagine the same could be said for that period.

Personally, I don't think it is going to happen anytime in the next decade. Additionally, it is easy enough for GW's successor to scrap the project.

I would love to see it happen. Think of the difference between now and when we first went. The country used to watch in awe as we sent men up for a couple laps around earth. Now, most of us don't even know when the shuttle is launched or when it comes back.

We have folks on the international space station. Is that not also fiscally irresponsible when compared to the problems here at home?

IMHO these ventures force us to push for new technologies and end up benefitting all of us at some point. (Better computers, GPS, materials such as Kevlar or Titanium that are now readily available.)

Will we learn anything revolutionary? Who knows. But it will certainly be amazing to see happen.

[kamloops]

I embrace the use of my tax dollars for this.
To comply with the wishes of the mods I will refrain from interjecting my beliefs of this
thread. BUT,,

I would much rather keep the engineers and
scientists busy working on solving the misteries of space travel than soaking the government on these riduculous environmental mitigation fee's
for public works jobs.
It's estimated that these fee's add what, 30% or more in the cost of a project. I may be way low on my numbers, but it's incredible what we pay for these studies.

[ 01-16-2004, 09:38 AM: Message edited by: kamloops ]

The new space program will employ thousands and boost the economy. I'd much rather see my tax money go their than into welfare or bureaucratic waste. Most of the research and engineering has been done and it only needs to be built. There was a working high thrust nuclear rocket engin developed in the late 60 that could power a maned ship to Mars fairly fast.

[lost_sailor]

Originally posted by Lured In:
LS...way to avoid picking a fight. [img]graemlins/berry.gif[/img]

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">MOI? ICI? Oo la la!

We'll have a "laser" on the moon!

[CATCH AND EAT]

JFK set forth a program and left it for someone else to finish (through tragic circumstances of his death). Certainly I see no difference of this dream from Bush. However it is paced way to slow. We could be on the Moon in 5 years and to mars in 15. Bush did mis-speak when he said we could use the moon as a launch point to mars. One way or another you still have to get a vehicle to the moon right?

"Where's Scottie when you need him."

"Darn it Jim, I'm just a country Doctor."

"Capt'n if we push her much harder she will fly apart"


Lost Sailor, your last post is pretty funny stuff.

[kamloops]

I have one, it's not my idea but I still like it.

If we can get this thing going quick, maybe the research will enable the US to launch the first manned mission to the Sun.

In the spirit of celebrating diversity, I nominate Hillary to be the first astronaut to the Sun. Heck, I'd even be the head of the fundraising campaign here in Wa. :grin:

[El-Kabong]

I am for space exploration, but why bother risking human lives when we can send fancy little robots that can do the work for less.

politically this is just a cheap election year stunt.

kamloops is on the right idea, but lets send W to the sun, afterall this is he idea (well okay his dad offered the same idea when he was president, great plan look where it got his dad!)

[ 01-16-2004, 11:52 AM: Message edited by: El-Kabong ]

[Radke]

What would you rather have?

A bucketfull of mars rocks, or a car that runs on hydrogen, and an efficent means of extracting hydrogen?

A picture of an american standing on mars
Or a cure or improved treatment of diabetes, or AIDS, or breast cancer, or Alzheimer's or(your choice here).

How about a cost effective replacement for lumber products that won't burn, rot, affected by pests, or deplete our natural resources?

While I really love science and this whole outerspace thing, this isn't the time to be investing so much of our limited resources for a 'potential' gain when we live in a target rich environment for really needed things. (IMHO)

[El-Kabong]

radke,

well said!

[El-Kabong]

Wyndknot,

you still doing 2 shows a night at Harvey's ?

[ 01-16-2004, 02:15 PM: Message edited by: El-Kabong ]

[El-Kabong]

just found this.

Mars Scorecard

who wants to volunteer for the first trip?

Hydrogen is not the answer. Mass amounts of water vapor will cause greenhouse problems as bad as carbon. Reliable electric powered mass transit is the best short tearm fix. Safe atomic power plants, not the Westinghouse and GE designed monsters of 50's and 60's, can provide electricity. Bio fuels are also proven technology. The only thing that holds these back is the petroleum loby and public demand. Do you own a diesel and run bio fuel? Do you ride the lite rail or bus? You are part of the problem.

[kamloops]

Radke


I could not agree more, well said.
BUT,
Each and every point you make the reasearch done on space exploration will have great impacts on
your points.

I think the real argument is whom is proposing the idea, not so much as the context.

[CATCH AND EAT]

And there is the answer folks, it's whom the suggestion arises from. Thanks Tom, you got it.

Not a good idea though to Send Hillary to the sun. She'll want to take a village with her and you know that could cause a solar flare that none of use could survive.

And if we sent W he might loose his way. :grin:

[corkyking]

I don’t think that I made my point.

Bush isn’t proposing that we develop new ways to log so that people in the NW can restart their industries.
He isn’t spending money to cure the ills of agriculture so that the small farmer won’t lose his farm.
Not one word from Bush about the huge gas price increase expected this spring thus filling the coffers of him and his friends.
He isn’t applying his much-vaunted conservative values to bettering the huge fishing industry in the NW.
He hasn’t created one single job in the 10 state West.
His tax cuts have sunk us deep in debt and have not created one dollar in the NW economy.

He has done what daddy wished he had done in Iraq thus covering dads mistakes for history.
He has given a lot of high-paid but essentially meaningless jobs to his constituents in Texas.
He has paid back his brother and the political machine for making him president in Florida.
He and his buddies will be filthy stinking rich (even more so) after he’s through with us.

I can’t stand his and his cabinets arrogance and it’s not that his actions are so unusual for a politician but we can’t even get a peck on the cheek before we are told to bend over.

[GOT2FISH]

I heard they have 80lbs Salmon on the moon and SNAGGING is legal. Two birds in the same bush?

[sturgn]

How long do you think it would take the private sector to get to Mars and back with humans if the goverment offered a 1 billion prize? I think when space is made profitable to the private sector you will see real exploration, until then we are waisting our time..... Just my random thoughts..........

[kamloops]

corkyking


I think you proved my point.
Just another Bush Hating thread.

[crabbait]

Let's see: List GW's "accomplishments" and its just another Bush hating post. Post support for Bush, you are a Patriot!

Got it....

[ 01-19-2004, 09:37 AM: Message edited by: crabbait ]

[ampersat]

I have to side with Radke on this one: we've got lots of problems to solve right here and while NASA missions will bring us some good stuff, it probably won't solve our most critical problems.

As long as we're on the subject of the space program, what's up with that rover? It's "the size of a golf cart" and "moves dozens of yards per day". Didn't these guys ever stop playing golf and watch a little Battlebots? Did they think that from millions of miles away they were just going to drop into the lap of exactly what it was they were looking for? Granted, they thought the crater they aimed for and hit (wow, they hit their target) would be the thing they were looking for but it wasn't. Big surprise there. Did it really never occur to them that they might have to travel somewhere to find the good stuff? The nearest thing that is scientifically interesting is 825 feet away. That's 275 yards and this thing is supposed to be active for only three months. They're not even sure they can make it there. AND IT'S SOLAR POWERED??? Mars has plenty of wind. We use wind power to generate electicity for entire cities and solar energy to power calculators. Why would they choose solar power for the rover? All this from the same folks who crashed their previous lander because some of the team were using metric measurements and some were using whatever the heck it is we call this measurement system we use. The same folks who sent up a near-sighted Hubble. So, say we are successful in finding water on Mars. So what. Does that solve world hunger? Can we grow genetically modified corn or mad cows there?

[CATCH AND EAT]

Originally posted by crabbait:
Let's see: List GW's "accomplishments" and its just another Bush hating post. Post support for Bush, you are a Patriot!

Got it....

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Now here is a guy that could be the headliner at Harveys. BTW how is Kerry doing in the poles today? [img]graemlins/eek13.gif[/img]

[ 01-19-2004, 05:21 PM: Message edited by: CATCH AND EAT ]

[kamloops]

I know it's hard to understand, but stay with me for a minute.

Let us tell the workers at President Bush's
"Buddies" companies, Boeing, Caryle Group, General Dynamics, Litton, Lockeed Martin, Northrup
Grumman, Raytheon Hughes, Rockwell, Textron, Trw
and United Technologies from the CEO to the floor sweeper that the Space program does not generate any jobs and it does not mean anything to Seattle or California and other towns in the USA.

[CATCH AND EAT]

Oh come on Tom lets just give all the jobs to AIRBUS for pete's sake. :depressed: Point well taken. :smile:

[corkyking]

It's not Bush hating. I don't even know the man.

I'm sure that the Dems are as bad they're just not as "in your face" handing out the goodies to their buddies.

Do you mean the Boeing that is now based in Chicago and is in the process of shipping the jobs overseas?

"In America, anybody can be president. That's one of the risks you take."
- Adlai Stevenson (1900-1965)

"The power of accurate observation is frequently called cynicism by those who don't have it."
- George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)

[ORoutdoorsman]

He has done what daddy wished he had done in Iraq thus covering dads mistakes for history

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Actually, the purpose of operation Desert storm was to remove Iraq from Kuwait, which was done successfully. The purpose was not to remove saddam from power. Desert storm was done in "co-operation" with the U.N. After saddam was removed from Kuwait, the U.N. had a plan of squelching saddam by removing any real military threat, and allowing him to stay in power if he co-operated with the terms set forth by the U.N., and would face consiquences if he did not. He stopped co-operating, and called the U.N.'s bluff. After the attacks of 9/11, we examined the threat of future terrorist attacks, and had enough intelligence to support Iraq posed a terrorist threat to us on many levels. Therefore, we acted on what should have been a joint U.N.effort. Saddam breeched the terms set forth by the U.N. during the Clinton administration. Neither the U.N. nor Clinton made any effort to enforce the U.N.'s policy on Iraq. Bush acted to clean up the U.N's mess, and eliminate a threat to the United States.

As far as statements about making him and his friends rich, those statements are based entirely on an assumption that you have made. And reguardless of what people assume, the economy does not turn bad or good in a matter of days. Economic change is slow, especially in the case of improving the economy. The economy was going bad at the end of Clintons reign, and got worse due to September 11th. Bush's economic plan is designed to better our economy, and build it strong, unlike the democrat's plan of dumping a whole lot of money for a very temporary partial fix(gee, sounds like the state we live in).

[ORoutdoorsman]

"In America, anybody can be president. That's one of the risks you take."
- Adlai Stevenson (1900-1965)

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Thats true, we had a sleazy adulterous draft dodger in office for 8 years.

[skahorse]

Corkyking,

I'm sure that the Dems are as bad they're just not as "in your face" handing out the goodies to their buddies.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Corky, it is just as bad, all politicians are slimeballs. You can't become president if you don't want to steal and lie. It's how this country works.

The reason you don't see it "in your face" is because the mainstream news has liberal bias. You should look to several places for your news, not just the Alphabet channels. Note, there's a lot of conservative bias out there too, just not so mainstream. I'm not advocating conservative bias outlets, however, if you compare both, you get closer to the whole picture.
(Plus, they do a better job of pointing out the dems backdoor deals)

P.S. Try a google search on Al Gore's handouts to Oil companies.

--Skahorse