Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

NASA to offer $100 billion moon program

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 06:42 PM
Original message
NASA to offer $100 billion moon program
Published: September 18, 2005, 2:13 PM PDT
By Reuters

With the shuttle fleet grounded and the International Space Station staffed by a skeleton crew, NASA is set to unveil plans on Monday to take people and cargo to the moon.

Even before the official announcement, there is criticism from Capitol Hill over the reported $100 billion cost of the lunar program, given U.S. government commitments to the Iraq war and the recovery from Hurricane Katrina.

"This plan is coming out at a time when the nation is facing significant budgetary challenges," Rep. Bart Gordon, a Tennessee Democrat on the House Science Committee, said in a statement. "Getting agreement to move forward on it is going to be heavy lifting in the current environment, and it's clear that strong presidential leadership will be needed."

To get astronauts back to the moon for the first time since the Apollo 17 mission in 1972, one team of designers envisioned an Apollo-style capsule sitting atop rockets fashioned from shuttle components, including the shuttle's massive external tank and solid rocket boosters. There would be a separate space vehicle to carry only cargo. <snip>

http://news.com.com/NASA+to+offer+100+billion+moon+plans/2100-11397_3-5871563.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Ezlivin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 06:43 PM
Response to Original message
1. Will that be check or cash?
I'm sure we've got that money ready to go...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
devinsgram Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #1
49. No, I think it will be cash or credit.
Or it could be the check's in the mail. LOL!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PSPS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 06:46 PM
Response to Original message
2. This is sardonically funny
Isn't it sad to see our nation pretend that it is still what it used to be?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TallahasseeGrannie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 06:46 PM
Response to Original message
3. I suggest we table this initiative
until N.O. is rebuilt!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrModerate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Agreed . . .
Even though I'm the biggest space fan around, and believe it's critical that we aggressively develop this technology.

Just not now. Maybe if we weren't blowing a billion a week in Iraq, then we could justify both The Gulf and this program.

But not now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gnostic Donating Member (269 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 03:06 AM
Response to Reply #5
76. Critical?
In what way is developing space programs like this "critical" for us lowly peasants down here on Earth? You remember Earth, don't you?

I don't see how it's critical at all. It would'nt affect my life one iota if we started colonizing the moon or not. I realize that it may be critical for those billionaires who can afford it to have a safe escape route to the moon or another planet once they toxify this one beyond livibility and once the population finally eats up all the resources, but frankly, I don't give a rat's behind about them too much. I'm not in their circle of influence.

This country has no health care for the working poor, it cannot deal with disasters that are KNOWN to happen beforehand, it can't fight even a farcical war of it's own making, the economy still snails along, homeless we can't take care of, etc, etc. But it's CRITICAL that we get some asshats in space?

Sorry, I don't get it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Massacure Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #3
21. How bout we rebuild New Orleans on the moon with unemployed Iraqis?
Then we get to kill three crows with one stone. :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
m0nkeyneck Donating Member (274 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-05 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #21
73. at least the moon...
is above sea level
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lochloosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 06:10 AM
Response to Reply #3
40. Why don't we table Iraq and then rebuild NO and go to Mars?
Edited on Mon Sep-19-05 06:10 AM by Lochloosa
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
koopie57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 06:48 PM
Response to Original message
4. I have a feeling bush thinks the moon is made
of cheese and he can feed the poor with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lerkfish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. Frankly, I think Bush sees a moon base as a weapons base
but maybe I'm cynical
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Love Bug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #9
51. No you're not -- read the PNAC document Rebuilding America's Defenses
Edited on Mon Sep-19-05 12:47 PM by Love Bug
One of their plans is to replace NASA as we know it with a separate military service called U.S. Space Forces, which would be under the DOD -- read pages 54-57.

BTW, they want the DOD to control the "internets" too. All for security reasons, of course.


http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #4
23. "Worked" for Reagan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robertwf Donating Member (233 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 06:52 PM
Response to Original message
6. How Many Space Cadets Are We Funding?
Didn't Obama just say the Repugs need some adult supervision in the budget area?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheCowsCameHome Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 06:55 PM
Response to Original message
7. If every Repug in the US will buy a ticket, I'll kick in a few $$ myself
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dudley_DUright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 06:55 PM
Response to Original message
8. How about we just send robotic missions to the planets like we are now
at a small fraction of the cost of manned missions, with much better science outcomes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gulfcoastliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 06:59 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Ding Ding! Yes we have a winner!
Send robots not people! Look at all the invaluable data gleaned from Hubble, rovers, satellites, Galilileo, Cassini-Hyugens, etc ad nauseum.

Send the unmanned craft - they work! (Assuming the NASA/JPL geniuses stay on the same page, re: US or metric calculations.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dudley_DUright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. Thank you, Thank you
What do I win?? :-)

Seriously, there are a lot of great science missions the JPL has on the drawing board that will be at substantial risk if this moon shot lunacy (pun intended) gets funded.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gulfcoastliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 07:55 PM
Response to Reply #13
19. People are so obssesed with sending people into space- but
we have gained pretty much ZERO science out of it. The ISS is a multibillion dollar boondoggle - they won't find out anything that the Russians didn't find out from their MIR station. NASA published ZERO peer-reviewed science from their shuttle missions, etc. Spend the money on the probes, not super-risky zero-science human rocket rides.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
macllyr Donating Member (72 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 07:32 AM
Response to Reply #19
44. I disagree with you
A quick search on PubMed with "space shuttle" delivers around 700 peer-reviewed articles since the first STS flight.

These are only papers about scientific research performed in the biomedical domain. I ignore how many thousands of articles were published in the aerospace technology/basic science/physics/astronomy/astrophysics/etc domains.

Mac L'lyr
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gnostic Donating Member (269 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 03:52 AM
Response to Reply #44
78. And what exactly...
....are the new technologies being discovered there after billions of dollars spent to do so helping the common man down here on earth in a practical way. Can you name even ONE?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
politicat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 04:25 AM
Response to Reply #78
80. Yes. Velcro.
Developed for space initially.
Also: silicone heat shielding, multiple high-strength/high temp plastics and metal alloys, and Gore-tex. Plastics developed for space use are commonly used now in cardiac bypass surgery. The robotics developed for space have been re-implemented for wheelchairs and assistance devices.... and the Roomba.

Much of the improvement in computer science and hardware development has been spurred either directly or indirectly by NASA. (Example: A project my partner worked on that was intended for NASA as a data management system was reworked as an electronic medical records data management system for Kaiser.)

Space does pay for itself -- if 1) space industry is not run by nest-feathering contractors and those more interested in job security than science and 2) if we recognize that science and technological development has a price that can't be outsourced to lowest bid contractors. And it does benefit ordinary people, if in no other way than by giving us back a sense of wonder, a set of tangible goals, and a feeling of hope in a world sorely lacking in both. Can you put a price on those?

I feel really sorry for you if you can't or won't or just haven't bothered to look up in the night sky and realize that we can go there and we can get off this rock.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingWhisper Donating Member (210 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #80
84. Well said.
These and a thousand other day to day conveniences, materials and life-building medicines have come about ONLY because of zero-G or near zero-G environments. I do agree with the sentiment that it's time to expedite the phaseing out of the current shuttle for the next-gen, but thats subject for another thread.

and yeah, you have to wonder why most people don't look up at night and just stand in awe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gnostic Donating Member (269 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #84
92. I do
Edited on Wed Sep-21-05 04:49 PM by Gnostic
I stand and look at the night sky in awe.

I also stand and look at our own planet and stand in awe of all the problems we are faced with and can't solve. And I stand in awe that there are so many people who are so unwilling to see these problems solved first before we go and try to make a mess of things up there.

If you have serious problems in your home, do you simply ignore them and walk away from them so you can go out into your community instead? Do you not think that be letting problems fester in your own home that they won't follow wherever you go? Can you hold down a job and do well at it and succeed in all other avenues of your life with serious problems at home you're not dealing with? Do you not think the problems we can't seem to solve HERE are'nt going to follow us anywhere else we go?

The race to the moon in the 60's was also a pork barrel fiasco, just a race to see who could get there first, could'nt let those old Russkies get there before we could, even though the Soviets were an iota smarter and decided to wait it out and do it right instead of race race race. We as humans truly resemble a race of lemmings.....once this rock is saturated with pollution (added to by your space rockets) and is so toxified and overpopulated to the point that resources can't keep up, mass hunger, whole populations starving, terrible wars, religious and social antogonisms, and pestilences like AIDS, then we can just jump off it like a group of lemmings off a cliff and shoot ourselves into space so we can find yet another rock to foul up. Cute.

But I'm sure they already have awesome ways to make going up in space worthwhile after all. Our guvment ALWAYS has our best interests at heart! Like building missile bases on the moon for instance. Hooray!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gnostic Donating Member (269 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #80
90. A few examples
To your credit you posted a few legitimate examples of technological developments which have a practical use on earth, so thank you for the response.

My response is, I'm pretty sure the human race could live without any of them as they have done for millenia. Nice that they're there now, but not completely necessary.

I do not understand, with all the problems down here on earth, why we feel the need to bork space up as well now. We can't run our affirs down here on this rock acceptably, and we can't find solutions to important problems here, but you want to send more asshats into space so we can discover a new form of velcro. Wonderful! I guess we can use all that velcro to re-build NO with, can't we? Who needs steel or iron? Heck, for that matter, who needs medical care? Why, if we helped the working poor in this country with even BASIC medical coverage we would'nt have the funds to send asshats into space with, would we? Can't have that. The porkbarrel space program would indeed suffer, along with the rest of the industrial complex that supports it and chews through our tax dollars like a puppy on a newspaper. But we don't have funds to even fight a farcical war of our own making, we don't have the funds to keep social security going into the forseeable future....but we have billions to blow in space so some new technology is found that has limited and semi-practical use and so some company can place a patent on it for years and rake it in.

And to answer this comment;

"I feel really sorry for you if you can't or won't or just haven't bothered to look up in the night sky and realize that we can go there and we can get off this rock."

I'll respond by saying I feel sorry for you that you can see all the problems, sufferings and needs for solutions right here on this rock and you still think it's a grand idea for us to blow more pollution into the atmosphere and send a few more wingnuts into orbit at a cost of a billion dollars a minute while people down here are struggling with everyday issues we don't have the funds to solve. Also, remember as you look up into that night sky, that we are already in space, so there's no REASON to get off this rock until we figure out the problems down here on earth. If we can do THAT, maybe, just maybe, when we decide to go into space, we won't end up destroying and making a mess of THAT too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Xithras Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #8
56. The superiority of the robotic missions is debatable.
For example, the Opportunity rover, in well over a year and a half of exploring, has only traversed a few kilometers of the Martian surface. A human being could have walked the same distance in an hour or two. With a buggy, we could have also picked up a much wider assortment of stones and returned them to a central lab, where a much larger suite of analysis equipment could have been standing by to examine them. We also have the ability to climb slopes and rock faces to look for evidence of water and life in places that rovers could never hope to reach. Heck, the simple process of picking up a rock and cracking it open with a pick...an activity that would take a human under 30 seconds to complete, is an all day job for the rovers.

Don't get me wrong, rovers do indeed have a place in exploration, but they'll never replace humans when the need comes for wide scale exploration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 06:59 PM
Response to Original message
11. If it means billions for his cronies, Bush will be all for it
But if they don't get a significant cut, he won't bother.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakeme2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 07:04 PM
Response to Original message
12. IMHO,,, I think NASA THOUGHT Bush was serious
and again IMHO, Bush does not plan to spend 100 Billion on the going to the moon.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
buzzsaw_23 Donating Member (631 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 07:10 PM
Response to Original message
14. Global Warming
Blowing more fumes into the atmosphere. Unwise, and yet you call yourself 'homo sapiens'? When will we as a species realize we already live in space and relearn how good it feels right here on Earth?

Icarus

‘Planet Earth stands on the cusp of disaster and people should no longer take it for granted that their children and grandchildren will survive in the environmentally degraded world of the 21st century.’ So said Britain’s Independent newspaper in reporting on the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, released at the end of March.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 07:21 PM
Original message
Aha! That's a great response.
Hahaha. I never thought of it that way.

And it has never ever made sense to me. And it never will make sense to me, to think of going to a place where there is no air, incorrect atmospheric pressure for the human body, wrong temperatures, no trees, no water, no fucking anything.

We already live in space. Geez, that is too obvious. Good one.


Now let's spend the money and engineer alternative energy conversion AND storage devices. That's probably too sane.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gnostic Donating Member (269 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 04:13 AM
Response to Reply #14
79. Excellent post
To the point and very well put.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MichiganVote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 07:14 PM
Response to Original message
15. I'd settle for a decent public street, an equitable education system,
and lower gas prices.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 07:17 PM
Response to Original message
16. Insane! Let's not become fossil fuel independent.
Let's not spend $100 billion on renewable energy conversion. And don't give me bullshit that we could perhaps discover the anwers to that by going into space. BULLSHIT! That would be your typical republican answer.

This is about one fifth of what we are paying to drop bombs on people. We are going to try and make our debt ten trillion dollars. At least we could do something to benefit mankind AND the planet. Shooting stuff into space is an employment scheme. Well, I say turn it around. Find someone with a brain who can carefully keep the nasa engineers employed. Or just keep killing people and pumping oil and buring it until we all start treading water.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
politicat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 04:43 AM
Response to Reply #16
81. Ummm... but we can.
We can better put solar power stations in space, where there is purely more solar energy (the atmosphere blocks a lot) then relay it to earth via microwaves, which are nearly lossless. The alternative is to pave the deserts with solar cells, and I'm sorry, but I think the desert ecology is too important to be destroyed that way. Low Earth Orbit, on the other hand....

If you want renewable energy and you're not willing to deal with pebble bed reactors, solar and wind are it, and solar is far more efficient in space than it is here on the surface.

This concept has been kicked around for a long time; we know it can be done. There's a small version on the ISS, and that's how they generate their power. If we can put up communications satellites so that everyone can receive Naked, Hot and Squirmy on Pay Per View, we can put up the hundreds of solar power stations we need.

It's not a republican answer, it's a scientific answer. I agree with you - the DoD budget needs to be slashed. Killing people for their oil is not where I want my tax dollars going. But it could be going to benefit humanity.... If we had the power, we wouldn't have water issues because we could in fact desalinate water. With more water, everything gets easier.

A Primer: http://www.eere.energy.gov/consumerinfo/factsheets/l123.html (This primarily a pre-* document. It is substantially unchanged since the first time I read it, back in 97 or so.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rocktivity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 07:21 PM
Response to Original message
17. Better they should offer it to the katrina victims.
:headbang:
rocknation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Meldread Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 07:21 PM
Response to Original message
18. This is important. It should be done.
The United States is capable of doing more than one thing at once. We should head back to the Moon and the sooner the better. There are some things that Robots just can't do for us. I would have preferred, though, had NASA been more ambitious in it's plan to actually setup a base on the moon. Launching space-crafts from the moon would be much cheaper and easier than on Earth.

Not only that, it would be interesting prospects for mining the moon for materials that we can ship back to Earth. NASA just isn't as ambitious as I'd like it to be. When we first said we were going to the moon, damn it, we put our all behind it and did it. Now it takes nearly two decades to do something similar with even MORE powerful technology.

The budget is a mess but 100 Billion is a drop in the bucket. Besides if the US does not want to do it, Scientists will look elsewhere.

Personally, I think we should dissolve NASA and other world space agencies and just form a International Space Agency and have all our resources pooled into one spot from various countries around the world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #18
22. The merits of going to the moon are debatable...
.. but the fact that NASA (the FEMA of space IMHO) isn't the organization to do it is not.

I wouldn't give NASA $10 billion. They are useless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ratty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #18
52. And what materials would those be?
Not only that, it would be interesting prospects for mining the moon for materials that we can ship back to Earth.

What could possibly be on the Moon that wouldn't be cheaper to get right here on Earth?

The budget is a mess but 100 Billion is a drop in the bucket.

Sorry, I think you and I must have different definitions of "drop" and "bucket."

Launching space-crafts from the moon would be much cheaper and easier than on Earth.

In order for this to be true it means actually building spacecraft on the Moon. So not only do we need a base and mining facilities, but also factories to build and assemble spacecrafts. That drop is getting awfully large.

I love Star Trek as much as the next guy and I think going to Mars is a worthy goal. I simply fail to understand the obsession with bases on the moon. We already have an international space station that, it turns out, nobody knows what to do with. All of the decades of planning and money and effort and man hours and we build the thing and, gosh, nobody figured out what we were supposed to do there. Let's not do this with the Moon too.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glugglug Donating Member (123 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #52
58. mining IS the real reason for renewed moon interest
Helium 3 will be the next oil.

On Earth it is extremely rare. The moon has over 1 million tons. 25 tons is enough to supply the entire U.S. with fusion energy for a year.

http://www.finetuning.com/articles/970-the-moon-the-persian-gulf-of-the-21st-century.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ratty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-05 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #58
71. And what will we use all this fabulous Helium 3 for?
Oh that's right, all the hundreds of fusion reactors we have. Wait, we don't have ANY fusion reactors, I forgot. But it's okay fusion energy is right around the corner (it's been right around the corner for 50 years but this time it's REALLY right around the corner. No, this time I'm serious. Honest.)

Let's see if we can learn to fuse deuterium first, then maybe in 30 or 40 years we'll have figured out how to fuse the MUCH harder He3. When that happens we can start to talk about a return to the moon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
politicat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 04:55 AM
Response to Reply #52
82. There are some serious differences with the moon that Space Stations
can't provide.

Fractional gravity, for one. It's hard to work in the ISS or live in the ISS because micro gravity is so hard on bodies. But 1/6th gravity is enough to work with. ISS is what happened when we failed to learn from the Russians - they had Mir up there for ever and pretty much said, "this is a research station." The US doesn't know what to do with ISS because as far as I can tell, we read Russian produced scientific papers. (But that's another rant.)

Reasons to go to permanent habitation on the moon: Here on earth, a clean-room is an incredibly expensive thing to maintain and build, and there's always some contamination. On the moon... it's easy. There are no contaminants like condensation or dust mites. Airless environments make it easy to maintain. So chip and other cleanroom production could be done for a fraction of the cost in the moon. Plus, there's enough silicon in the moon that it's not a problem to make the things, and the energy that is so expensive down here is practically free there - solar power on the surface.

There's the eggs in one basket concept - we've pretty much screwed this planet up, and we need some "off-site backup."

There'st he fact that we can't get to Mars without having a place at the top of the gravity well - and that's Luna. We can't use ISS to launch a real mission or colony to Mars because we have to have something we can use to bould the heavy lift capacity that is outside of the gravity well and not in microgravity. Again, we can use lunar materials to build the crafts and to supply the crafts to go to Mars much easier than we can build the crafts on earth or at the ISS.

That's off the top of my head at 4 am.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daleo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 07:57 PM
Response to Original message
20. Why bother?
I mean, we know it can be done if enough effort is put into it. But, it seems pointless unless there are plans to establish a permanent base.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Meldread Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #20
24. Here is what NASA says:
Edited on Sun Sep-18-05 08:19 PM by Meldread
I did a quick google on that very question: "Why should we go back to the moon?" Here is what NASA said:

http://lunar.arc.nasa.gov/project/faq.htm#17
Why should we go back to the Moon now?
Much of the Moon remains a mystery. Data collected by the Apollo missions focused on a narrow band around the Moon's equator, mapping only 25 percent of the lunar surface. Prospector will fill in the gaps.

Scientists have been anxious to return to the Moon since the Apollo missions, because prospecting for additional information about the Moon's resources, composition, and gravitational and magnetic fields is a necessary step toward planning future lunar missions, particularly ones transporting humans. If a lunar base is established, the Moon could become a stepping stone (or stop-off point) for missions to the rest of the Solar System. Additionally, scientists are eager to know the composition of the Moon because it will help them understand how the Earth/Moon system evolved.
Now, we can explore the unknown 75 percent of the Moon's surface "Faster, Better, and Cheaper" with Lunar Prospector.

You can Google for more, the above relates to Lunar Prospector but the same reasons for going to the Moon are still relevant to this discussion. NASA will likely reveal reasons for going when they unveil the project officially.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dudley_DUright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 08:42 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. But the link you provide just proves the point
that robotic mission yield more science at a tiny fraction of the cost of manned missions. After all, Lunar Prospector is a robotic mission.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Meldread Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. Yes, but you miss the fact...
...that Robots cannot achieve what Humans can. Robots have software and hardware limitations. Humans do not. If a Human were on Mars right now he or she would have accomplished all that Spirit or Opportunity have already accomplished plus an extra 600% or more in less time.

Is it dangerous? Yes. So what? It is dangerous getting up in the morning. It was dangerous when Columbus set sail believing (correctly) that the world wasn't flat. Sending someone to the Moon or any other place outside of Earth is similar to Columbus setting sail. Manned missions are invaluable. You cannot put a price tag on them.

The Moon is our stepping stone to the rest of the solar system and universe. We *have* to go back.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dudley_DUright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #28
30. Humans have lots of limitations that robots do not
They need food, water, air and they cannot tolerate low g environments for very long without serious bone loss. Besides, if there is life on Mars right now, the last thing we want to do is contaminate it with a bunch of microbe infested humans. We would be screwing up that what we wish to study most.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ben Ceremos Donating Member (387 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 06:47 AM
Response to Reply #28
43. Space, the final frontier...
and the grave of humanity and other living beings. Space is filled with radiation, much of it deadly. We have no reliable means of shielding our tissues from this radiation. Manned space-exploration is a ruse to funnel billions of dollars to the defense industries. No human will ever be found walking on any planet, even within our own solar system. Money that is made on Earth should be used to promote the well-being of the inhabitants of the Earth, all of them. Robotic exploration of space is akin to bringing up core samples from under the oceans. It is a "result", but not a boon to mankind. It is time to refocus on our own planet before seeking to distract ourselves with the folly of manned space-travel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wickerwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 04:18 AM
Response to Reply #24
37. I'm laughing hysterically.
What else would a space mission launched under the Buch administration be named besides "Prospector"?

There's gold in them there hills!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Emperor_Norton_II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-05 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #37
74. Lunar Prospector was a Clinton-era program.
So sorry to deflate your snark, pelase try again when you actually know WTF you're talking about. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wickerwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 01:54 AM
Response to Reply #74
75. I think we have a winner
for cranky, self-righteous post of the month.

Lighten up dude. We're all on the same side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jersey Ginny Donating Member (549 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 08:31 PM
Response to Original message
25. I've always loved NASA and the space exploration they do
I really enjoy the pictures and data that has come from Hubble. I follow the various spacecraft that we send to distant planets and moons. I think it is money well spent overall. The missions to Mars have been really interesting and informative. I have doubted the value of the international space station all along. I think it has been more about politics and improving relations with the Soviets/Russia than any real science. That has value, also. However, I draw the line at a mission to the moon for a preliminary price tag that could rebuild 1/2 of New Orleans. You know it will cost more also. I guess everything actually will. I agree that sending unmanned vehicles is the way to go. Let some other country spend a ton of money going to Mars. Who actually cares who gets there? Let the Chinese go. I don't care. In fact, it would be wonderful if another country went. Progressives know how to share.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pepperbelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
26. not the time for new product introduction. Tin ear at NASA. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maple Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 08:53 PM
Response to Original message
29. Should be Mars they aim for
the moon is already lost.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 09:14 PM
Response to Original message
31. Let China do it.
We're broke.

Besides, I just don't see Tang, Space Food Sticks, and pens that write on whipped cream as having any real merit to mankind.

Do your homework, then go party. We can't even keep our infrastructure together.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gtar100 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 09:16 PM
Response to Original message
32. Sure, why not?
Why spend that money on:


  • civil work programs for the unemployed
  • education for our population
  • health care for all
  • alternative energies for a sustainable future


Who needs life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for the masses when we can send a handful of people to the moon? They can bring back more rocks that we can marvel at.

In all seriousness, everything we dream to do as a people, for the whole planet, is possible, if wealthy people and corporations were willing to pay their fair share in taxes and the politicians were willing to spend it wisely. Now that's asking for the moon!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IDemo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #32
33. We are not now in the position to recraft JFK's vision
I was a true believer in NASA and manned space missions during my youth (the Gemini/Apollo era). That, along with the influence of Carl Sagan, led me to pursue astronomy in college, before economics dictated a return to the working world.

I am no longer the fan of manned spaceflight I was when Neil Armstrong and company landed on the Moon during the week of a summercamp in my 12th year. Not surprisingly though, Neil recently gave a 'Yes' vote to continued manned exploration.

While I continue to believe that manned exploration of the Moon and our solar system is an important part of our future, the time is not now. The coming economic cloud (if not collapse) cannot be ignored, as much as Bush has displayed the capacity for ignorance. We humans have very pressing immediate needs to attend to, the transition to a non-petroleum-based civilization not the least among them.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dudley_DUright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-18-05 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. Well said ID
Sorry you did not get to finish your astronomy degree. I too am a big fan of Carl Sagan and have read pretty much all his books (may he rest in peace).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mallard Donating Member (460 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 04:33 AM
Response to Reply #32
38. Re: Just think what great pictures and ....
... brand new moon rock samples we will get for the $100 billion, whether or not the project leaves people stranded up there when the Fed goes belly up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosco T. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 03:01 AM
Response to Original message
35. 100 billion over a 13 year project....
unlike 200 billion in a year in Iraq
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Borgnine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 03:03 AM
Response to Original message
36. Why do I get the feeling Bush wants to turn it into the Death Star?
Be afraid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truthisfreedom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 05:27 AM
Response to Original message
39. strong presidential leadership will be needed? well, that screws that.
no leadership is available in America today. we're on our own.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GOPAgainstGW Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 06:36 AM
Response to Original message
41. NASA Funding Needs To Be Significantly Cut Back n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ladylibertee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 06:44 AM
Response to Original message
42. They can envision all they want to look, bottom line, this pork...
project is going to have to go on the back burner.There is no way we can spend this sort of money on frivolous space crap when our nation is facing, not only a pre-existing rather costly war, but reconstruction of the entire gulf region on the United States.it's retarded that NASA is ready to "unveil" plans.They can give their little presentation, but Congress better hold back releasing any funds for that crap.if they do, Media is going to jump ALL over it and Bush's base with crumble even more.Total bull Shit this is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KansDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 08:11 AM
Response to Original message
45. Hey, Bush! Here's a "moon program." And it's free!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kailassa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 09:41 AM
Response to Original message
46. stop the sacrifice
When the last space shuttle was launched, NASA at first tried to cover up the initial reports of bits falling off it, saying no, they'd fallen off a few days back, not during the launch. And one thing they never mentioned this time, but which was brought out in the reports of the previous disaster, was that it was ice forming behind the foam insulation that made the foam fall off as it melted away from the fuel tank, meaning that the shuttle was likely hit by a chunk of ice much heavier than the foam that they finally admitted to.

I'm sure that most of NASA staff are wonderful, intelligent people, but they are let down by a management who care more about cost cutting, keeping to timetables and covering their own butts to have any chance of being trustworthy leaders. So I hope that no astronaut goes back into space until an organisation is put together in which everyone cares more about the astronauts' lives than about their own jobs.

And who else was sickened by Bush's smugly delivered comment to the crew as they undertook repairs? "Thank you for risking your lives for the sake of exploration", or words to that effect. I felt that he was saying, "well you can't complain about dying, it was in the contract you signed, and I've nobly done my bit by thanking you."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noonwitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 12:19 PM
Response to Original message
47. What, is there oil there or something?
Otherwise, it's a "been there, done that" for NASA. Let's put humans on Mars! At least it would be something new.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glugglug Donating Member (123 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #47
57. Close.... better... FUSIONABLE Helium 3
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/helium3_000630.html
http://www.finetuning.com/articles/970-the-moon-the-persian-gulf-of-the-21st-century.html

This has me wondering... I own 1777 acres of lunar property, including mineral rights. How do I ensure the federal government pays if they use said property? Also, how rich in Helium 3 is the area 24-28 degrees North and 46-50 degrees west?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BSDRebel Donating Member (74 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
48. CUT BACK IRAQ!
I'm not sure if anyone else has said it, and perhaps it's selfish, but, you know, my tax dollars are first and foremost for us here in the U.S. Given that I don't trust what we're doing in Iraq, and that reconstruction money is not being used efficiently (it's actually being laundered and stolen), I want the Iraq adventure stopped and the money back here. ANd I want that money invested in housing, healthcare, food, education, and rebuilding our national infrastructure.

Isn't that what governments do with tax dollars? When did paying for foreign invasions and missile defence or corporate welfare get into the picture?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
genieroze Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
50. Yet they called Jerry Brown Moonbeam.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 03:23 PM
Response to Original message
53. I am for this only if the seat of government is relocated to the moon.
To the moon, Georgie, to the moon!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rob H. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 03:29 PM
Response to Original message
54. I can't help but wonder how much of that money will go to Halliburton
I'm also thinking DU needs an "I'm only half-kidding" smilie....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 03:42 PM
Response to Original message
55. What a damned waste. Manned space flight is an abomination.
My professor was adament about NOT using manned flight.

The money is much better spent NOT investing in life support systems.

Also, the technological development is far greater and more immediately practical when designing robots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IDemo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #55
59. I agree with your professor
When the Space Age/Space Race began, the technology to build todays robotic missions simply didn't exist. Admitted that the Gemini/Apollo era contributed to the technological development at the time, but space missions aren't required nowadays to grow technology, even that technology specific to space exploration. Hi tech has taken off on its own merits and will continue to do so. The Mars rovers have provided several times their designed lifetime of return in data and show no sign of letting up soon.

The Buck Rogers age of rocket-ridin' space cowboys is over, or should be, but McDonnell Douglas and other big aerospace business interests have the same pipeline to the money as Halliburton.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OfireitupO Donating Member (46 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #55
60. i agree
Edited on Mon Sep-19-05 11:05 PM by OfireitupO
its a waste to spend so much to just...'go to the moon'.


Whats the point really? Is there something there now that wasnt there when we went last time? We should focus on health care and scientific study, not on PR moon missions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 11:52 PM
Response to Original message
61. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
sakabatou Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 11:56 PM
Response to Original message
62. Other than a trip to Mars, what is the point?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davepc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 03:16 AM
Response to Reply #62
77. Here is why:
President Pitzer, Mr. Vice President, Governor, Congressman Thomas, Senator Wiley, and Congressman Miller, Mr. Webb, Mr. Bell, scientists, distinguished guests, and ladies and gentlemen:

I appreciate your president having made me an honorary visiting professor, and I will assure you that my first lecture will be very brief.

I am delighted to be here and I'm particularly delighted to be here on this occasion.

We meet at a college noted for knowledge, in a city noted for progress, in a State noted for strength, and we stand in need of all all three, for we meet in an hour of change and challenge, in a decade of hope and fear, in an age of both knowledge and ignorance. The greater our knowledge increases, the greater our ignorance unfolds.

Despite the striking fact that most of the scientists that the world has ever known are alive and working today, despite the fact that this Nation¹s own scientific manpower is doubling every 12 years in a rate of growth more than three times that of our population as a whole, despite that, the vast stretches of the unknown and the unanswered and the unfinished still far outstrip our collective comprehension.

No man can fully grasp how far and how fast we have come, but condense, if you will, the 50,000 years of man¹s recorded history in a time span of but a half-century. Stated in these terms, we know very little about the first 40 years, except at the end of them advanced man had learned to use the skins of animals to cover them. Then about 10 years ago, under this standard, man emerged from his caves to construct other kinds of shelter. Only five years ago man learned to write and use a cart with wheels. Christianity began less than two years ago. The printing press came this year, and then less than two months ago, during this whole 50-year span of human history, the steam engine provided a new source of power.

Newton explored the meaning of gravity. Last month electric lights and telephones and automobiles and airplanes became available. Only last week did we develop penicillin and television and nuclear power, and now if America's new spacecraft succeeds in reaching Venus, we will have literally reached the stars before midnight tonight.

This is a breathtaking pace, and such a pace cannot help but create new ills as it dispels old, new ignorance, new problems, new dangers. Surely the opening vistas of space promise high costs and hardships, as well as high reward.

So it is not surprising that some would have us stay where we are a little longer to rest, to wait. But this city of Houston, this State of Texas, this country of the United States was not built by those who waited and rested and wished to look behind them. This country was conquered by those who moved forward--and so will space.

William Bradford, speaking in 1630 of the founding of the Plymouth Bay Colony, said that all great and honorable actions are accompanied with great difficulties, and both must be enterprised and overcome with answerable courage.

If this capsule history of our progress teaches us anything, it is that man, in his quest for knowledge and progress, is determined and cannot be deterred. The exploration of space will go ahead, whether we join in it or not, and it is one of the great adventures of all time, and no nation which expects to be the leader of other nations can expect to stay behind in the race for space.

Those who came before us made certain that this country rode the first waves of the industrial revolutions, the first waves of modern invention, and the first wave of nuclear power, and this generation does not intend to founder in the backwash of the coming age of space. We mean to be a part of it--we mean to lead it. For the eyes of the world now look into space, to the moon and to the planets beyond, and we have vowed that we shall not see it governed by a hostile flag of conquest, but by a banner of freedom and peace. We have vowed that we shall not see space filled with weapons of mass destruction, but with instruments of knowledge and understanding.

Yet the vows of this Nation can only be fulfilled if we in this Nation are first, and, therefore, we intend to be first. In short, our leadership in science and in industry, our hopes for peace and security, our obligations to ourselves as well as others, all require us to make this effort, to solve these mysteries, to solve them for the good of all men, and to become the world's leading space-faring nation.

We set sail on this new sea because there is new knowledge to be gained, and new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for the progress of all people. For space science, like nuclear science and all technology, has no conscience of its own. Whether it will become a force for good or ill depends on man, and only if the United States occupies a position of pre-eminence can we help decide whether this new ocean will be a sea of peace or a new terrifying theater of war. I do not say the we should or will go unprotected against the hostile misuse of space any more than we go unprotected against the hostile use of land or sea, but I do say that space can be explored and mastered without feeding the fires of war, without repeating the mistakes that man has made in extending his writ around this globe of ours.

There is no strife, no prejudice, no national conflict in outer space as yet. Its hazards are hostile to us all. Its conquest deserves the best of all mankind, and its opportunity for peaceful cooperation many never come again. But why, some say, the moon? Why choose this as our goal? And they may well ask why climb the highest mountain? Why, 35 years ago, fly the Atlantic? Why does Rice play Texas?

We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.

It is for these reasons that I regard the decision last year to shift our efforts in space from low to high gear as among the most important decisions that will be made during my incumbency in the office of the Presidency.

In the last 24 hours we have seen facilities now being created for the greatest and most complex exploration in man's history. We have felt the ground shake and the air shattered by the testing of a Saturn C-1 booster rocket, many times as powerful as the Atlas which launched John Glenn, generating power equivalent to 10,000 automobiles with their accelerators on the floor. We have seen the site where the F-1 rocket engines, each one as powerful as all eight engines of the Saturn combined, will be clustered together to make the advanced Saturn missile, assembled in a new building to be built at Cape Canaveral as tall as a 48 story structure, as wide as a city block, and as long as two lengths of this field.

Within these last 19 months at least 45 satellites have circled the earth. Some 40 of them were "made in the United States of America" and they were far more sophisticated and supplied far more knowledge to the people of the world than those of the Soviet Union.

The Mariner spacecraft now on its way to Venus is the most intricate instrument in the history of space science. The accuracy of that shot is comparable to firing a missile from Cape Canaveral and dropping it in this stadium between the the 40-yard lines.

Transit satellites are helping our ships at sea to steer a safer course. Tiros satellites have given us unprecedented warnings of hurricanes and storms, and will do the same for forest fires and icebergs.

We have had our failures, but so have others, even if they do not admit them. And they may be less public.

To be sure, we are behind, and will be behind for some time in manned flight. But we do not intend to stay behind, and in this decade, we shall make up and move ahead.

The growth of our science and education will be enriched by new knowledge of our universe and environment, by new techniques of learning and mapping and observation, by new tools and computers for industry, medicine, the home as well as the school. Technical institutions, such as Rice, will reap the harvest of these gains.

And finally, the space effort itself, while still in its infancy, has already created a great number of new companies, and tens of thousands of new jobs. Space and related industries are generating new demands in investment and skilled personnel, and this city and this State, and this region, will share greatly in this growth. What was once the furthest outpost on the old frontier of the West will be the furthest outpost on the new frontier of science and space. Houston, your City of Houston, with its Manned Spacecraft Center, will become the heart of a large scientific and engineering community. During the next 5 years the National Aeronautics and Space Administration expects to double the number of scientists and engineers in this area, to increase its outlays for salaries and expenses to $60 million a year; to invest some $200 million in plant and laboratory facilities; and to direct or contract for new space efforts over $1 billion from this Center in this City.

To be sure, all this costs us all a good deal of money. This year¹s space budget is three times what it was in January 1961, and it is greater than the space budget of the previous eight years combined. That budget now stands at $5,400 million a year--a staggering sum, though somewhat less than we pay for cigarettes and cigars every year. Space expenditures will soon rise some more, from 40 cents per person per week to more than 50 cents a week for every man, woman and child in the United Stated, for we have given this program a high national priority--even though I realize that this is in some measure an act of faith and vision, for we do not now know what benefits await us.

But if I were to say, my fellow citizens, that we shall send to the moon, 240,000 miles away from the control station in Houston, a giant rocket more than 300 feet tall, the length of this football field, made of new metal alloys, some of which have not yet been invented, capable of standing heat and stresses several times more than have ever been experienced, fitted together with a precision better than the finest watch, carrying all the equipment needed for propulsion, guidance, control, communications, food and survival, on an untried mission, to an unknown celestial body, and then return it safely to earth, re-entering the atmosphere at speeds of over 25,000 miles per hour, causing heat about half that of the temperature of the sun--almost as hot as it is here today--and do all this, and do it right, and do it first before this decade is out--then we must be bold.

I'm the one who is doing all the work, so we just want you to stay cool for a minute.

However, I think we're going to do it, and I think that we must pay what needs to be paid. I don't think we ought to waste any money, but I think we ought to do the job. And this will be done in the decade of the sixties. It may be done while some of you are still here at school at this college and university. It will be done during the term of office of some of the people who sit here on this platform. But it will be done. And it will be done before the end of this decade.

I am delighted that this university is playing a part in putting a man on the moon as part of a great national effort of the United States of America.

Many years ago the great British explorer George Mallory, who was to die on Mount Everest, was asked why did he want to climb it. He said, "Because it is there."

Well, space is there, and we're going to climb it, and the moon and the planets are there, and new hopes for knowledge and peace are there. And, therefore, as we set sail we ask God's blessing on the most hazardous and dangerous and greatest adventure on which man has ever embarked.

http://vesuvius.jsc.nasa.gov/er/seh/ricetalk.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ladylibertee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-05 12:01 AM
Response to Original message
63. They need to come back to earth with that.....I hope congress
Edited on Tue Sep-20-05 12:03 AM by ladylibertee
does not make yet another stupid mistake by funding this crap.We have an entire gulf coast that needs funding.We cant afford to hand over 100 million plus so NASA can let four idiots bounce around on the moon in what ,10 or thirteen years from now? Hey NASA, your so excited about the future, how about fixing those levies for us in New Orleans?I know it's out of your job description, but that never stopped our government. Ha Ha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MisterP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-05 12:12 AM
Response to Original message
64. I'm in an interesting "middle of the road" position:
neither violently against it nor raving with the manic urgency of the space colonizationist: I don't wanna ream out the South Pole-Aitken Basin for moon dirt or tritium or nuke the Martian ice caps. NASA ditched the Giotto mission into Jupiter's clouds to avoid any possible contamination of Europa and Callisto.
Space is best left to non-chimps--I mean in the Oval Office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackpine Radical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-05 12:14 AM
Response to Original message
65. The MOONDOGGLE!!
What I really hate about this is the weaponization of space.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NorthernSpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #65
85. LOL!
"Moondoggle" it shall be named!

:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NorthernSpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #85
86. disaster at home, a pointless war abroad: time to go back to the moon?
Now's the time to spend a hundred billion or so in mooning over our glory days?

God help "sister Nell".

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The_Casual_Observer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-05 12:21 AM
Response to Original message
66. "in the pigs eye"
Forget it, they would be lucky to get 50 million dollars for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheDonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-05 01:21 AM
Response to Original message
67. I do hope we don't forget about our space exploration
cut this other waste out like um' let's see.... IRAQ!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laughing Mirror Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-05 02:40 AM
Response to Original message
68. "NASA to put man on moon by 2020." Heavens how boring!
Edited on Tue Sep-20-05 02:41 AM by downstairsparts
When I saw this news crawler on BBC World last night it looked like a pitiful case of déjà-vu to me. When we heard JFK say in 1960 that US should strive to put humans on moon by end of the decade, it meant something then. But to hear more or less the same thing being repeated half a century later sounds like a bad remake of an old black and white film. It sounds like desperation.

We've already been to the damn moon. Why ask for the moon when we can have the stars?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Capt_Nemo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-05 04:39 AM
Response to Original message
69. Forget about the moon
This is about creating a fake project to fund the development
of the Heavy Lift Booster thing, for launching the components of
a more ambitious "Missile Defense" program.
Once that rocket is developed the whole moon stuff will be canceled
and your taxpayer's money will have been used to fuel their derranged
dreams of global domminance...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nihil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-05 06:09 AM
Response to Reply #69
70. Bingo!
This hides some of the expensive defence work out in the open and also
fends off the "peacenik" protests until it's too late.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defiant1 Donating Member (452 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-05 01:04 PM
Response to Original message
72. To hell with that....
Totally pointless. Too much other nonsense that we have to bankroll before we can go back to giving NASA nerds their stiffies.

:thumbsdown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blackwater Donating Member (33 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
83. I'm all for it
I also think that we should pay our own way. I don't want the bill to be passed on to the next generation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pitohui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #83
88. we should NOT pay our own way
we are not the ones who will benefit from colonies on moon or mars

it will be our grandchildren's generation who will benefit or maybe not even until the generation after that

in this particular case, i see no prob. in not paying for this, as we personally will see no benefit & we're broke as it is

nothing wrong w. buying the grandchildren a fancy gift but too many of us are w.out a house right here on earth at the moment

the moon will have to wait

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ourbluenation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 12:42 PM
Response to Original message
87. timing is everything and these guys have nuthin! eom...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 01:53 PM
Response to Original message
89. There are so many more important things to do with that money.
Generally speaking, the space program is a waste of time and money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stickdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-05 04:36 PM
Response to Original message
91. My sister's corpse rots in the street, and whitey's on the moon.
My brother has no food to eat, but whitey's on the moon.

http://www.counterpunch.org/heron01152004.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 06:31 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC